
•^-''O^ ;. 



^-^ 


















,0 






^^. 















K^"^ V^ 




.^^ 















> ^^^ 






\^^^^" 












■'%'. 



V^^ 



■^<'. A^ 






^°-*^ 






V. * » « * .^^ 




















'^A..>X 



o 






^;> 




G" 



'^0' 






-^0 ° '^•v. 



<^ 'o.k ,0 '-' '.•5 •(.>■ ^^ A ■'7> A 







THE 



Archives of Maryland. 



3funD-"2PubUcaltoTi, QTlo. 23. 



THE 



Archives of Maryland 

AS ILLUSTRATING 

THE SPIRIT OF THE TIMES 

OF THE 

EARLY COLONISTS. 




A Paper read before the Maryland Historical Society, 

January 25, 1886, 

HENEY STOCKBEIDGE. 



gallimorr. 1886. 



PEABODY PUBLICATION FUND. 



Committee on Publication. 

1886. 

JOHN W. M. LEE, 
BRADLEY T. JOHNSON, 
HENRY STOCKBRIDGE. 



Printed by John Murpht t Co. 

Printers to the Maryland Historical Society. 

Baltimore, I 886. 



EXPLANATORY. 

The following paper was pre])ai-ed at the request of the Mary- 
land Historical Society, as a sort of codification of the three 
volumes of Maryland Archives, published for the State by that 
Society. It makes no claim to original, or extended research, but 
is confined to the field to which it was limited by the vote of the 
Society, and has no aim but to alleviate the labor of (or be an 
index to) the investigation of that publication. The volumes, as 
issued, are not numbered, and fm- convenience of reference are 
cited as if numbered in the order of their publication. This 
remark is rendered necessary by the fact that the volumes are not 
in regular succession in point of time, the third volume being 
synchronous with the other two, giving the Proceedings of the 
Colonial Council for the same period for which the first and 
second give the Proceedings of the General Assembly. The first 
volume issued contained the "Proceedings of the Assembly" 
from 1637 to 1664, and is referred to as " 1 Ar. " ; the second, 
" Proceedings of Assembly " from 1666 to 1676, referred to as 
" 2 Ar." ; and the third, " Proceedings of the Council " from 1636 
to 1667, referred to as " 3 Ar." 

H. S. 



THE 



"ARCHIVES OF MARYLAND. 



WHETHER the "Archives of Maryland" 
are, or are not books of the sort to which 
Lord Bacon referred when he wrote, "Some 
books may be read by deputy, and extracts made 
of them by others," I trust no apology will be 
thought necessary for suggesting that they are the 
sort of books that the average " consumer of mod- 
ern literature" will be the rather apt to read "by 
deputy " than in any other way. Possibly it was 
that thought which induced the Historical Society 
to request that one be deputized to visit the oases, 
in what even they regarded as an arid region, and 
to bring before them a report of the flora and 
fauna, if any should be found. The Society's man- 
date to undertake that task is this deputy's excuse 
for the present paper. 

An examination, however, of the three volumes 
of "Archives of Maryland" now issued is not 
devoid either of entertainment or profit. The 

1 



grand old Hebrew prophet called upon his nation 
for its instruction, " Look unto the rock whence 
you are hewn, and to the hole of the pit whence ye 
are digged." In the same spirit it cannot be alto- 
gether unwise for us to revert to the beginnings of 
our civic life, and finding there the germs of many 
of the customs, institutions, and names that linger 
with us still — the protoplasm out of which much 
of the beauty and fragrance of our present social 
and political life has been evolved — learn their 
reason and real meaning. 

During the thirty years covered by the volume 
of the Archives which is devoted to the " Proceed- 
ings of the Council," and all but a few months of 
the thirty-eight years covered by the two volumes 
the "Proceedings of the Assembly," Caecilius 
Calvert, the second Lord Baltimore, the grantee of 
the Charter of Maryland, was living, and directing 
the affairs of the province, as well as it was practi- 
cable for him to do from a residence so remote as 
his in England, with the slow modes of communi- 
cation then enjoyed, and in a country passing 
through vicissitudes like those of England at that 
day. It is a key that unlocks the meaning of 
many of the events transpiring in the colony, to 
remember that the period covered by them em- 
braces the last thirteen years of the reicn of 
Charles I. (till 1649), the revolution, chaos, civil 
war, and Oliver Cromwell's Protectorate of the 



Commonwealth for ten years (till 1660), and from 
that date the restoration, and reign of Charles II. 

Under the power granted him in his charter to 
deputize one to act for him in his absence Lord 
Baltimore conferred vice-proprietary authority 
upon persons selected by him, and resident in the 
province, to exercise there all the high powers with 
which he was vested — subject at all times, how- 
ever, to a right of revision and veto still reserved 
to himself. 

This authority was for the most part, conferred 
upon members of his own family — his brothers 
Leonard, and Philip, and his "sonne" Charles. 
The exceptions were that on the death of Leonard 
Calvert, in 1647, Thomas Greene acted, by death- 
bed appointment of Leonard, for one year (3 Ar. 
187), till William Stone was duly commissioned 
(Id. 201), and he retained the position, with a brief 
interruption by the Commissioners of the Council 
of State for the Commonwealth of England, in 
1652 (Id. 271), till supplanted by Commissioners 
appointed " in the Name of his Highness the Lord 
Protector of England, Scotland, Ireland and all 
the dominions thereto belonging" in 1654 (3 Ar. 
211). When Lord Baltimore was able to resume 
his charter rights, in 1656, he was so unfortunate 
as to select Josias Fendall as his lieutenant ; after 
whose "Mutiny and Sedicon " he confined himself 
to his own family — his brother Philip (1660) (3 
Ar. 391) and son Charles (1661) (Id. 439). 



Lord Baltimore's Authority. 

Lord Baltimore's Charter gave him little less 
than the power of an absolute monarch. It con- 
stituted him and his heirs " veros et absolutes 
dominos et Proprietarios " (3 Ar. 4) of the realm 
granted him, and thus vested him with all power, 
civil, military, naval and ecclesiastical — head of 
Church and State on sea and land. In his exercise 
and delegation to his lieutenants of the power thus 
granted he exercised, and delegated all. He never 
forgets, nor do they, to describe him as "Absolute 
Lord and Proprietary of the Provinces of Mar}^- 
land and Avalon," and he is the entire govern- 
ment, — the legislative, the judicial and the execu- 
tive. Thus his commission to Leonard Calvert 
"constitutes, ordaines and appoints him our Lieu- 
tenant Generall, Admirall, Marshall, Chancellor, 
Chiefe Justice, Chiefe Magistrate, Chiefe Capt & 
Comder as well by sea as by land " (3 Ar. 152-3) ; 
and wl^en Leonard Calvert was temporarily absent 
he transferred to "my welbeloved cosin william 
Brainthw^ Esq." the same offices (Id. 160). The 
same are embraced in the commission to William 
Stone (Id. 202-3) ; and he appointed Thomas 
Greene, Esq. " to bee his said Lopps Lieveten*nt 
Generall, Chancellor, Keep of the great Seale, Ad- 
mirall, chiefe Justice, Magistrate & Comander as 
well by Sea as by land of this his Lopps Province of 



Maryland and the Islands to the same belonging" 
(Id. 231, 241). We find the same wide range of 
authority and power conferred upon Thomas Hat- 
ton (Id. 255), and upon Charles Calvert (Id. 542), 
and the Governor and "Councell" contract " Peace 
with the Cynicoes Indians " and " make a Warre 
w''' the Susquahannoughs " (2 Ar. 378), exercising 
the highest attribute of sovereignty. The same 
power was conferred by the council on Robert 
Evelin (Id. 102) ; on Cornwallis (Id. 133), and on 
Fleet (Id. 150). And this was in full harmony 
with the claim of Leonard Calvert years before 
(1642). On that occasion the Assembly "express- 
ing a great Opposition to the march against cer- 
tain Indians the Lieu* General told the Burgesses 
he did not intend to advise with them whether 
there should be a march or not for that Judsrment 
belonged solely to himself as appeared by the 
Clause of the Patent touching the power of war 
and peace, but to see what Assistance they would 
Contribute to it in case he should think fit to go" 
(1 Ar. 130). The exercise of such high power was 
the complaint of the commissioners, Bennett and 
Clayborne, who charged that these colonial officials 
had pressed against the adherents of the Com- 
monwealth charges of " Sedition & Rebellion 
againat the Lord Baltemore, whereby not onely 
the Lands, houses and plantations of many hun- 
dreds of people, but also their Estates and lives 



6 



were liable to be taken away at the pleasure of 
the aforesaid Lord Baltemore and his officers " 
(Id. 312). 

It is true that the charter in giving "free full 
and absolute Power to Ordain, Make and Enact 
LAWS" provides that tliis be done "with the 
Advice Assent & Approbation of the Freemen of 
the Province" — but this no more constituted them 
the legislating power than the requirement at the 
present day, that certain appointments of the 
executive shall be subject to confirmation by the 
senate, constitutes the senate the appointing power. 
On the contrary, we read of measures discussed 
and adopted b}^ the assembly and the addition 
"then the Lieu* General enacted it in his Lord- 
ships name for a Law" (1 Ar. 136). Indeed the 
common form of enactment was " Be it Enacted by 
the Lord J'roprietary with the Assent of the Ypper 
and Lower howse of the General Assembly" but 
in the troubled and uncertain times of the English 
revolution we find them entered " Acts made by 
William Stone Governor" (1 Ar. 28o, 299). Acts 
passed by the General Assembly and approved by 
the Governor had force until laid before the Pro- 
prietary when his "disassent" rendered them void 
(1 Ar. 75). It was no uncommon thing for acts 
passed by the General Assembly to fail of approval 
by the Governor ; and in some instances acts that 
had passed and met the approval of the Governor 



were rejected by the Lord Proprietary when exam- 
ined by him in Enghind. And his dignity and 
authority were protected by this rigorous enact- 
ment. 

" All mutinous or sedicious speeches, practices or attempts 
(without force) tending to divert the obedience of the people 
from the right Ho''^* Cecilius nowe Lord Baron of Balte- 
more, and Lord and Proprietary of this Province or his heirs 
Lords & Proprietaries of the Province or the Governor of or 
vnder him or them for the time being (and proved by two 
sworne witnessas shalbe lyable to bee punished with im- 
prisonm' during pleasure, not exceeding one whole yeare, 
fined, banishm' boaring of the Tongue, slitting the nose cut- 
ting of one or both Eares, whipping, branding with a redd 
hot Iron in the hand or forhead, any one or more of these as 
the Provinciall Court shall thinke fitt." 

If such offence was coupled with force, to this 
assortment of penalties were added — 

" losse of hand 
or the paines of death, confiscacon of all lands, goods & chat- 
tells within the Province banishm' ymprisonm' during life 
any one or more of these as the Provinciall Court shall 
adiudge " (1 Ar. 428). 

Meanwhile it required great tact to keep in 
harmony with the shifting powers of the home 
government, and, taking one consideration with 
another, their lot upon the j)olitical fence was not 
a happy one. 



8 



The determined eifort evidently was to be upon 
the side of whatever party was dominant in Eng- 
land. 

In ]S"ovember, 1649, Greene acting as Governor 
in the temporary absence of Governor Stone, pro- 
claimed Charles, " the most renowned Prince of 
Wales the vndoubted rightfull heir to all the 
dominions of his ffather Charles of blessed memory 
and Kinge of England Scotland ffrance and Ireland 
defender of the ffaith &c " and followed this by " a 
general pardon to all and every the Inhabitants of 
this Province for all and every Offense and Offenses 
by them or any of them committed" (3 Ar. 243). 
In 1654 Governor Stone proclaimed the Common- 
wealth the government of England and Oliver 
Cromwell Protector, and granted " a Generall 
pardon of all offenses Committed in this Province 
Since the last Generall pardon" (Id. 304). And 
a Paper in the Public Record Office declares " itt 
is notoriously knowne that by his express direc- 
tions his officers and the people there did adhere 
to the Interests of this Commonwealth when all 
the other English Plantations " did otherwise 
(Id. 280). But the English Commonwealth ceased 
to be and the Stuart dynasty re-ascended the throne, 
and then, on the nineteenth of November, 1660, the 

"Gou'"& Couuc-ill " " by the spcciall order and authority of 
the Right Honno'*'* the Lord Proprietary of the Province, 
Doe aocordin<^ to our duty and allegiance, heartily joyfully 



9 



and vnaniraously acknowledge and proclaime, that imediately 
upon the decease of our late Soueraigne Lord King Charles 
the Jmperiall Crowne of the Realme of England and of all 
the kindoms Dominions and Rights belonging to the same 
Did by inherent birthright, and lawfidl and vndoubted Suc- 
cession descend and come to his Most Excellent Ma'^ Charles 
the Second as being lineally, iustly and lawfully next heirc 
of the bloud Royall of this Realme " (3 Ar. 393). 

And yet, five years before, the colonists, by direc- 
tion of the Proprietary, were so loyal to the existing 
government as to execute official bonds running to 
"Oliver Lord Protector of England" (3 Ar. 318). 

Land System. 

The whole territory described by Lord Balti- 
more's charter was granted to him absolutely, sub- 
ject only to the payment to the king of England of 
two Indian arrows a year, and he was enabled 
thereby to hold out strong inducements to settlers 
by proffers of land in large tracts to those who 
would occupy and improve it. It was not easy 
however to protect them in the titles granted by 
him in the manner which was practiced in Eng- 
land, and in 1639 an act was passed rendering 
enrolment by the Secretary of the Province essen- 
tial to the perfection of a title by grant from the 
Lord Proprietary, and another requiring the "Reg- 
ister of every Court to keep a book of Record, in 
9 



10 



which he shall enter all grants, Conveyances, Titles, 
and successions to land at the request of any one 
desiring the same to be entred " (1 Ar. 61, 63). 

Voluntary enrolments were much neglected, and 
the enrolments, made in the Secretary's office under 
this provision, were "mostly hjst or embezzled in 
the rebellion of 1644," and efforts were made to 
replace them from the original grants as far as 
possible (Id. 329; 3 Ar. 230). But the voluntary 
recording of conveyances, no special sanction being 
given to the record, proved ineffectual, and in 1671 
an act was passed which has undergone very little 
modification from that day to this, and is substan- 
tially our conveyancing, and record system of 
to-day (2 Ar. 305, 3S9). 

In the " Conditions of Plantations" proclaimed 
by Lord Baltimore in 1636 (3 Ar. 47), in those of 
1642 (Id. 99), and in those of 1648 (Id. 223, 233), 
liberal grants of land were made to all settlers who 
chose to avail themselves of them — so much to 
each man, so much additional for his wife, for each 
minor child, and for each servant — to be held by 
the grantee perpetually, yielding specified rents to 
the Lord Proprietary, thus initiating the unfortu- 
nate s^^stem of "ground-rents," of the pernicious 
effects of which w^e have not yet seen the end. 

Special grants of tracts to be " erected into a 
Manner," " with such Royalties and Priviledges 
as are most usuallv beloncrino- unto Manners in 



11 



Engl'^" were promised and made: Manors of two 
thousand acres to any person who in any one year 
transported twenty settlers to tlie province (3 Ar. 
223) ; manors of three thousand acres to any one 
who transported thirty persons (Id. 233) ; while 
Robert Brooke, for transporting himself, wife, 
eight sons, two daughters, twenty-one men ser- 
vants and eight maid servants, was granted one 
whole county wherever he might see lit to locate, 
and was made commander and the embodiment of 
nearly all other offices in such county, as well as 
a member of the colonial council (3 Ar. 237, 
240, 256). 

This county was located on the south side of the 
Patuxent River and called Charles County (3 x\r. 
260). But only four years passed before Lord 
Baltimore lost his abundant love for, and confi- 
dence in Robert Brooke, and proceeded to " make 
Void and Villify " that order and to order that 
Charles County be absorbed into and make a part 
of Calvert County (3 Ar. 308). 

Among the claims for land under the pledges of 
Lord Baltimore we find the Jesuit, Thomas Copley, 
who demanded twenty thousand acres of land for 
transporting certain persons, twenty in number, 
into the province, and in his list of persons so 
transported we find the names, well known to us, of 
the Jesuit fathers, Mr. Andrew White and Mr. Jo: 
Altam (3 Ar. 25^). 



L.ofC. 



12 

But extensive as Avas his territory, and lavish as 
he was in bestowing it upon his subjects, Lord 
Baltimore apparently had a craving for all the 
land that joined him, and the gathering of the 
State's Archives has brought us from the Public 
Record Otfice in London, a letter addressed to him 
by the King as early as July, 1638, rebuking him 
most sharply for his dealings with the "Planters 
in the Island near Virginia which they have nomi- 
nated Kentish Island," warning him to desist and 
closing with the menacing suggestion, " herein we 
expect your ready conformity, that we may have 
no cause of any further mislike" (3 Ar. 78). 

But the boundary between Virginia and ^lary- 
land on the " Easterne Shore" continued to be a 
fruitful source of misunderstanding. Oliver Crom- 
well, in 1(353, interposed his authority, as " Cap- 
tayne Generall of all the forces of the Common- 
wealth," in most devout phrase, to obtain a "speedy 
resolution of the question" (3 Ar. 296). Lord Bal- 
timore sent over maps (Id. 319, 327) ; Commis- 
sioners were appointed, and various expedients 
resorted to, but the question was not resolved in 
Cromwell's day, as he had hoped. 

Upon their other side toward the " Swedish 
nation inhabiting in Delaware Bay," a conciliatory 
tone was adopted in order " to worke and prcure 
an Intercourse of trade and Commerce" "which 
probably may redound much to th(3 beuelitt and 



13 



advantage of this Commonwealth" (Governor 
Stone, March 1653, 3 Ar. 300). 

But when the Dutch planted themselves on the 
Delaware his Lordship gave "Instruction & Com- 
mand to send to the Dutch to Command them to 
be gon." This mission was entrusted to Coll : 
Nathaniel Ytie of Baltimore County, and he was 
ordered to 

"make his repaire to the pretended Governor of 
a People seated in Delaware Bay . . and to reqnire him to 
depart the Province. . . That in case he find opportunity he 
insinuate vnto tlie Peo})le there seated that in case they make 
theyr application to his Lordships Govern' heere they shall 
find good Condicdns to all Commers w*''' shall be made good to 
them " &c. (3 Ar. 365). 

In the negotiations which followed, though there 
is much to interest and amuse, there is very little 
of which Marylanders can be proud. The Dutch 
state their case clearl}", logically, and firmly, 
though mildly, and conclude " Soe wishing the 
Lord God AUmighty will Conduct your honno'" 
both to all prudent results that Wee may line 
neighbourly together in this Wilderness to the 
advancement of Gods Glory and Ivingdome of 
Heaven amongst the Heathens and not to the 
Destruction of each others Christian bloud whereby 
to strenigthen the Barbarous Jndians nay rather 
ioyne in loue and league together against them 
Which God our Saviour will grant" (3 Ar. 374, 5). 



14 



Lord Balliinore blusters, has no name for them 
but "Ennemies Pyratts & Robbers," orders an 
expedition against them, " to make Warre against 
and to pursue said Ennemies Pyratts & Robbers 
to vanquish & take them And to seize and keep 
all or any houses and Goods" &c. (Id. 427). 
But the council deeming discretion the better part 
of valor, and, apprehending that they could get no 
assistance from Xew England or Virginia for the 
expedition, resolved that "All Attempts be for- 
borne against the said towne of A'ew Amstell & 
that they finde certainely whether the said towne 
of Xew Amstell doe lye within the fortyth degree 
of ^"ortherly Latidude or not " (Id. 428). 

Lord Baltimore was evidently a master of such 
emphatic epithets and fond of rigorous measures. 
Captain William Clayborne had all his property of 
every kind seized for his " sundry insolences Con- 
tempts and Rebellions against our lawfull Govern- 
ment and Propriety" (3 Ar. 7(3, 82, &c.), and 
was held unpardonable (Id. 205, 221). Ingle is 
a "rebel," a "pirate" (1 Ar. 238, 270, 301), and 
a "K^otorious and ungrateful villain" (3 Ar. 214, 
216), and is exempted from pardon: Gov. Fendall 
is a " perfideous and perjured fellowe" "a false 
and vngrateful fellowe" (1 Ar. 420j, and is 
excluded from all pardon (3 Ar. o9G). William 
ffuller is a " violent jncendiary and Seditious 



15 

'pson " (3 Ar. 400). John Jenkins and others Ihe 
same (Id. 445). 

While thus jealous of trespasses upon his terri- 
tory, however, the privileges of settlers which were 
originally only accorded to English and Irish were 
extended in 1648 to French, Dutch and Italians 
(3 Ar. 222, 232), but he excluded from these 
privileges all "corporations. Societies, Fraterni- 
ties, Guilds, or Bodies Politick either Spiritual or 
Temporal," and did not permit any grants that he 
had made to be assigned to such (3 Ar. 227, 235), 
" Because all Secrett trusts are usually intended to 
decieve the Government and State where they are 
made or some other persons " (Id. 237), and the 
importation of convicted felons was specially pro- 
hibited (2 Ar. 485). 

Special encouragement was given to settlers on 
the Eastern Shore of Virginia to immigrate into the 
adjoining counties of Maryland (3 Ar. 469, 495), 
and naturalization was granted to all applicants as 
a matter of course, as readily as it now is (2 Ar. 
144, 205, 271, 282, 330, 400, 403, 460, &c.), without 
requiring of them that most absurd oath that is 
now exacted. They merely "promised & engaged 
to submitt to the Authority of the Bight Hon : ^^'^ 
Caecilius Lord Baltemore" (3 Ar. 339, 398,429, 
435, 465, 466, 470, 488, 514, 529, 533, 557, &c.). 



16 



The Labor System. 

Intimately connected of course with the tenure 
of land was the system of labor, and this, accord- 
ing to the practice in England in that day, was 
largely servile labor. As already seen, induce- 
ments were held out to colonists to transport to 
the colony as many servants as possible by grants 
of land proportioned to the number transported. 
These servants were of two classes — slaves and 
indentured apprentices, or persons under contract 
to serve a certain length of time, to repay the cost 
of their passage from England. In some instances 
it appears that the length of the period of service 
was limited by contract entered into before leaving 
England, and in others was left uncertain, subject 
to subsequent adjustment. This could not fail to 
lead to disagreement, and call for legal interposi- 
tion, and among the laws proposed to the General 
Assembly of 1638-9, debated and approved, and 
which failed to become a law, (with all the others 
then considered) after engrossment, was one " That 
all persons being Christians (Slaves excepted) of 
the age of eighteen years or above and brought 
into this province at the charge and adventure of 
some other person shall serve such person at whoes 
charge and adventure they were so transported for 
the full terme of foure years" and "All persons 
under the a2:e of ei2:hteen vccrcs shall serve until 



17 



such person shall be of the f^ill age of four and 
twenty Years " (1 Ar. 80). 

Some, however, it is manifest did not submis- 
sively render the service which they owed, and in 
1641, running away was made felony punishable 
with death (1 Ar. 107). In 1643 a letter was 
addressed " to the Governor of the New JN'ether- 
lands," complaining that " Some servants being 
lately fledd out of this colony, into yours, we could 
not but promise o'selves from you that iustice & 
faire correspondence as to hope that you will 
renriand to vs all such apprentice servants as are or 
shall run out of this goverm* in to Yours," &c. (3 
Ar. 134). For the purpose of recovering fugitive 
servants who took refuge among the Indians, an 
article was inserted in the treaty with the " Jndian 
Nation of Sasquesahanogh," in July, 1652, which 
provided that any servant escaping from the one 
nation and takino" refu^-e with the other " shall 
with all Convenient speede be retourned back and 
brought home" (Id. 277). In the same year with 
the letter to the Governor of the New Nether- 
lands, Lord Baltimore as a matter of economy 
directed 

" That all my carpenters & other apprentice ser- 
vants be sold forthwith for my best advantage, w'''' I vnder- 
staud will yield at least 2000'"' tob apiece althoughe they have 
but one yeare to serve, especially if they be carpenters, for I 
vnderstand that 1500'"' of tob is an vsuall rate for the hire of 

3 



18 



one yeares labour of any ordinary servant. And I conceive 
it better to hire at a certainty such servants from yeare to 
yearc as my Commis" shall find necessary to looke to my 
cattell, provide sufficient fodder for them, & to manage my 
farme at west S' maries, . . then to have servants apprentices 
there for that purpose, & to send supplies yearly out of Eng- 
land to them " (3 Ar. 141). 

In 1654, and again in 1661, acts were passed 
prescribing the time which servants should serve 
those who brought them into the province, grading 
the time of service from four to seven years, 
according to the age of the servants, or if they 
were under twelve years when brought they were 
not to be free till they reached the age of twenty- 
one years. These acts required the " masters and 
owners " of these servants to take them to the 
Court on their arrival, that the Court might 
" Judge of their age " and enter the same of record, 
and to allow them " at the Expiration of their 
Severall times of Service besides their old Cloathes 
one Cloth suit one pair of Canvis Drawers, one 
2:)air of Shoes & stockings one new Hatt or Capp, 
one falling Axe one weeding Hoe, two Shirts and 
three Barrells of Corne " (1 Ar. 352, 409). By the 
act of 1666 the length of time of serving was 
increased by one year upon most of the grades of 
servants (2 Ar. 147). See also Id. 335, 523. 

To guard against the loss of slaves by their 
claiming freedom " according to the lawe of Eng- 



19 



land " as the result of their becoming Christian- 
ized and receiving baptism, a law was passed in 
1664 that 

" all Negroes and other slaues shall serue Durante 
Vita, And all Children born of any Negro or other slaue be 
Slaues as their ffathers were for the terme of their Hues And 
forasmuch as divers free borne English women forgettfnll of 
their free Condicon and to the disgrace of our Nation doe 
intermarry with Negro Slaues . . . whatsoever free borne 
woman shall intermarry with any slane shall Serue the master 
of such slaue dureing the life of her husband And all the 
issue of such freeborne woemen soe marryed shall be Slaues 
as their Withers were " (1 Ar. 526, 533). 

But even this act did not sufficiently inspire con- 
fidence in the security of this species of property 
so but what " Severall of the good people of this 
Prouince were discouraged to import Negroes," 
and others " to the Great displeasure of Almighty 
God and the prejudice of the Soules of those poor 
people Neglected to instruct them in the Christian 
faith or to Endure or permitt them to Receive the 
holy Sacrament of Baptisme for the Remission of 
their Sinns " and it was accordingly enacted in 
1671, that " becoming Christian, or receiving the 
Holy Sacrament of Baptizme " 

'' the same is not nor 
shall or ought the same to be denyed adjudged Construed 
or taken tobe or to amount vnto a manumicon or freeing 
Inlarging or discharging any such Negroe or Negroes Slaue 



20 



or Slaiies or any his or their Issue or Issues from his her their 
or anv of their Servitude or Servitudes Bondage or bondages " 
(2 Ar. 272). 

In the revolutionary times of the Commonwealth 
(1651), an example was set whicli has been fol- 
lowed in later times, and the power was conferred 
" to discharge and set free from their masters all 
such persons soe serving as Soldiers " (3 Ar. 265), 
as was also another Example by which " all such 
persons as haue approved themselves faithfuU to 
his LoP and don good service were preferred before 
any others to such places & imployments of trust 
& i)rotitt as they may be resj)ectively capeable 
of" (Id. 326). 

It was thought necessary in 1666 to enact a law 
" prohibiting Negros, or any other Seruants to keepe 
piggs hoggs or any other sort of Swyne, uppon 
any pretence whatsoeur" (2 Ar. 75), and down to 
the end of the period covered by these volumes, 
there was felt to be a necessity for stringent, and 
yet more stringent laws for preventing the escape 
of the owned laborers, and securing the return of 
" Runnawaies " (2 Ar. 146, 298, 523, &c.) 

Currency. 

The money question was a very serious one with 
the colonists, and they were forced to devices which 
would have added lustre to the financial fame of 



21 



Lycurgiis if he could have hit upon such financial 
expedients for Sparta. Besides the Indian cur- 
rency of Peake and Roanoake, which was em- 
ployed to some extent (3 Ar. 502, 530, 549, 555), 
Tobacco was a legal tender from the first, though 
not the exclusive one. In May, 1638, Capt. Henry 
ffleete gave bond to the government in the penalty 
of "one hundred pound weight of good beaver" 
not to trade with any Indians or " transport any 
truck throughe any part of this Province to trade 
with any Indians on the South side of Patowmeck 
River" (1 Ar. 74). In 1640 in collecting his rents 
Lord Baltimore authorized them to be received in 
the " Commodities of the Country " and " four 
pound of tobacco or one peck of wheat " was the 
equivalent of twelve pence, and two capons equal 
to " sixteen pound of Tobacco or one Bushel of 
wheat." Official fees and salaries were rated in 
tobacco (1 Ar. 57) ; taxes for ordinar}' and extra- 
ordinary expenses were levied in tobacco (3 Ar. 
119, 124) ; and fines and penalties imposed in 
tobacco. Governor Charles Calvert (3 Ar. 477), 
the council (Id. 480), and the General Assembly 
(2 Ar. 35, 6, 7, 8, 143, &c.), designate tobacco as 
the " commodity," " the only comodity by which 
this province doth at present Subsist." But as 
the supply of this fiat money was practically 
unlimited, and so became a nuisance, the legisla- 
tive power required creditors to forbear all collect- 



22 



ing of their debts, or accept " Tobacco att the rate 
of Three halfe pence sterling by the pound of 
tobacco" (2 Ar. 142, 220). Another measure of 
relief adopted (1662), was "an acte for Encour- 
agem^ of soweing English Grayne," which provided 
" that wheate here groweing shall pass and be taken 
at iiue shillings the Bushell : Barley and English 
pease att three shillings the Bushell, Rye at foure 
shillino-s the bushell and oates att two shillino-g six 
pence the Bushell " and should be receivable for 
all debts, public or private, and discount tobacco 
debts at two pence per pound (1 Ar. 445), and 
the Lord Proprietary published an ordinance for 
receiving " dry hydes at two "^p' and raw hydes at 
1-^ i 'p pound" (3 Ar. 458). 

As in mining regions the search for precious 
metals banishes all ordinary agricultural pursuits, 
so here the production of tobacco — the substitute 
for a circulating medium — threatened the colony 
with starvation. In 1640 a penal act was passed 
requiring every hand planting tobacco to plant 
and tend " two acres of Corne," and at the same 
time another " prohibiting the exportation of 
Corne " ; and the inspection of tobacco, by one of 
the three viewers who were appointed in every 
hundred, Avas made compulsory (1 Ar. 97). These 
acts or some of them were renewed in 1642 (1 Ar. 
160), and repeatedly thereafter (Id. 217, 251, 309, 
350, 360, 371; 2 Ar. 561; 3 Ar. 48). But the 



23 



depreciation of this currency (tobacco), as the 
result of over production, was so serious an evil, 
that the colonists made effort after effort for relief, 
by compelling- the suspension of its cultivation 
(3 Ar. 340, 476, 504, 506, 547). And in 1666 an 
elaborate non-production treaty was negotiated 
with Virginia (3 Ar. 550, 558). Lord Baltimore, 
however, sent from England his " 'Pticular & 
expresse Disassent, Dissagreement & Disappro- 
bacon " of the measure and it of course was a 
nullity (Id. 561). Lord Baltimore tried to furnish 
a better currency than tobacco by coining money 
in England and sending it over to the colony 
(3 Ar. 383, 385) ; but the Council of State in Octo- 
ber, 1659, at the instance of Richard Pight, " Clerk 
of the Irons in the Mint," " ordered That a War- 
rant be issued forth for the apprehending of the 
Lord Baltamore and such others as are suspected 
be engaged with him in making and transporting 
money" &c. (Id. 365). Change of administration 
at home wrought change of condition here, and, in 
1661, there was passed " an acte for the Setting vp 
of a Mint within this Province of Maryland " 
(1 Ar. 414), and steps were taken to provide bul- 
lion for its working and to force its coinage into 
circulation (Id. 429, 444). 

Some idea of the purchasing power of tobacco 
in exchange for necessaries and luxuries may be 
formed from the bill presented to the General 



24 



Assembly (April 21, 1666), by "John Lawson, 
High Slieriffe of St. Maries," for executing a negro 
and two Indians. The items are: 

To 2 dayes imprisonm' the Negro w*** dyett 060 

To a man to watcli him 2 dayes & 1 night 040 

To the s*^ man for his dyett & paynes 070 

To Graue making & other Expences 095 

To the Exequuting the s^ 3 persons 800 

1065 

but this was deemed an overcharge and he was 
voted a round thousand pounds in full settlement 
(2 Ar. 94). 

General Assembly. 

The rio-ht of assent or dissent to the laws which 
Lord Baltimore should propose was conferred upon 
all the freemen of the province. They were called 
to meet by proclamation of the Governor and all 
had a right to participate, but it was promptly 
provided that the freemen of any locality might 
meet and " Elect and nominate such and so many 
persons as they or the maior part of them so 
assembled shall agree vpon to be the deputies or 
burgesses for the said freemen in their name and 
steed to advise and consult of such things as 
shalbe brought into deliberation in the said assem- 
bly " (1 Ar. 74, 154, 259). It was thus a " General 
Assembly " in fact, — a name that we retain though 
we have long ceased to know the thing itself. 



25 



The Governor exercised the right of requiring 
by special " Writt " the attendance of anyone not 
sent as a deputy, and any refusal or neglect to 
send deputies, or to attend if deputized, or sum- 
moned, rendered the " Refusers or Neglecters 
according to their demerits " liable to a tine, and 
to be " Declared Enemies to the publick peace of 
the Province and rebell to the lawful Government 
thereof" (1 Ar. 328). It was allowable however 
for any person to be present by proxy instead 
of in person, and on some occasions the proxies 
were as numerous as the persons in attendance 
and some two or three held enough to be a 
majority of the body. 

The assembly when convened was expected to 
attend to business. At its first meeting the rule 
adopted was " The house shall sit every day holy 
days excepted at eight of the Clock in the morning 
& if any Gentleman or Burgess not appearing 
upon call at such time as the President is set at or 
after such hour shall be amerced 20"" of Tobacco to 
be forthw'"" paid to the use of the house " (1 Ar. 
53), and on the journal at repeated roll calls the 
entry opposite to names is "Amerced for tar- 
die" (Id. 36, 37, 39), and the amount of the fine 
for tardiness was, some years later, increased to 
one hundred pounds (Id. 131), and subsequently 
reduced to fifty pounds of tobacco (Id. 274). There 
was also some change in the hour of meeting, 



26 



special adjournment being made at times to seven 
o'clock in the morning (2 Ar. 74, 83, 86, 184), 
never till later than nine. It seems probable, 
however, that time pieces were not so numerous 
or accurate as to prevent disputes on the ques- 
tion of tardiness, for in 1642 they adopted this 
rule, " the drum to beat as near as may be to sun 
rising and half an hours distance between each 
beating," and every man who would avoid the fine 
must bo in his place " at the third beating of the 
drum " — that is one hour after sun rise, and as this 
was in the month of July, the meeting must have 
been a little before six o'clock in the morning (1 
Ar. 131). That may have been found slightly to 
interfere with committee w'ork, for the distance 
between drum beats was, at a subsequent session, 
changed to one hour (Id. 171). 

There was one person in the province who 
inclined to a very broad interpretation of the 
term " freemen " as fixing the qualification of per- 
sons to sit in the General Assembly. This was 
Mrs. Margaret Brent, kinswoman of the Calverts, 
first of her sex here to demand equal rights for 
women. To the session of 1647-8 she 

"came and 
requested to have vote in the howse for her selfe and voyce 
allso for that at the last Court 3'^ Jan : it was ordered that 
the said M" Brent was to be lookd uppon and received as his 
Lp» Attorney. The Gou' denyed that the s"* Mrs Brent 



27 

should have any note in the howse. And the s* Mrs Brent 
protested agst all proceedings in this pnt Assembly nnlesse 
shee may be pnt. and have vote as afores*" (1 Ar. 215). 

Though the Governor was thus ungallaiit, and 
the Lord Proprietary regarded her with anything 
but favor, the General Assembly appreciated her 
courage, tact, and ability, in a most perilous time 
and wrote to his Lordship a year later: 

"As for 
Mrs. Brents undertaking & medling with your Lordships 
Estate here we do verily Believe and in Conscience report 
that it was better for the Collonys safety at that time in her 
hands than in any mans else in the whole Province after your 
Brothers death for the soldiers would never have treated any 
other with that Civility and respect and though they were 
even ready at several times to run into mutiny yet she still 
pacified them till at the last things were brought to that strait 
that she must be admitted and declared your Lordships attor- 
ney by an order of Court or else all must go to ruin Again 
and then the second mischief had been doubtless far greater 
than the former so that ... we conceive from that time she 
rather deserved favour from your Honour for her so much 
Concurring to the publick safety then to be justly liable to 
all those bitter invectives you have been pleased to express 
against her" (1 Ar. 239). 

In 1650 it was determined that the Assembly 

" be held by way of vpper & Lower howse to sitt in two 
distinct roomes apart for the more convenient dispatch of the 
business to bee consulted of. And th* the Gou' and Secretary 



28 



or any one or more of the Counsell for the vpper howse, And 
any fine or more of the Burgesses assembled Shall haue the 
full power of ct bee two howses of Assembly to all intents 
and purposes. And all Bills passed by the s'' two howses 
shall have the same eflPect in Law as if they were aduised and 
assented unto by all the ifrecmen of the Province personally " 
(1 Ar. 272). 

That arrangement though then adopted for only 
the current session still continues. The names by 
which they appear in the archives are " Upper 
howse " and "Lower Howse " though the latter in 
1675 took to itself the alias name of " House of 
Commons" (2 Ar. 440). His Lordship retained 
the prerogative of convening the Assembly when 
he pleased, and of summoning to sit in it such 
number as he pleased; but in the time of the 
Commonwealth, instructed perhaps by events that 
had transpired in England, it was enacted that the 
Assembly should be convened at least once in 
three years (1 Ar. 341), and in 1676 the " Citti- 
zens and deputies of the lower howse of Assem- 
bly " complained so loudly to his Lordship because 
" by his Lordships command fower deputies or 
deleoates had been elected " in each countv and 
then " but two were called by his Lord''' Writt To 
Sitte in the Assembly" that his Lordship yielded 
to the request, only exacting an oath of allegiance 
to himself (2 Ar. 507). 

The General Assembly thus constituted, both 
before and after its division into two houses. 



29 

shows a purpose to do things decently and in 
order, and a determination to protect its own 
prerogatives and dignit3^ At its first meeting 
it adopted as a standing ride of order what it 
often reiterated, till it obtains at the present 

clay that " no One shall refute another with 

any nipping or vncivill terms nor shall name 
another but by some Circumloquation as the 
Gentlemen or Burgess that spake last or that 
argued for or against this bill" (1 Ar. 33, 131, 
171, 215, 273; 2 Ar. 64, 441). But they appar- 
ently found occasion to check something more 
objectionable than " reuiling speeches," for they 
adopted the rule that " noe one shall come into 
eyther of the howses whillst they are sett, with 
any gun or weapon uppon perill of such fine or 
censure as the howses shall thinke fitt" (1 Ar. 
216, 273 ; 2 Ar. 65, 441). 

The daily sitting would seem to have been 
terminated at first at the will of the Governor, 
or Lieutenant General, as the closing entry of the 
journal each day is "Governor (or Lieutenant 
General) adjourned the house" (1 Ar. 173, 175, 
&c.) And though in 1642 " it was declared by the 
howse that the howse of Assembly may not be 
adjourn'd or Prorogued but by and with the Con- 
sent of the howse" (1 Ar. 117), and a little later 
there was "the protest of some of the howse 
a<^ainst his Lordships power of adjournment" 



30 



(1 Ar. 180), his Lordship did not yield the right, 
and it is only for a short time that we find such 
entries as "the howse adjourned itself" or "the 
howse was adjourned by the sj)eaker" (1 Ar. 
276, &c.) 

Between the two houses a jealousy was soon 
developed which gave rise to some sharp verbal 
contentions between them. The one insisted on 
being regarded as the UPPER House; and the 
other sturdily maintained an equality, if not supe- 
riority. In 1660 it sent "to the Governor and 
Councell " a message " that this Assembly of Bur- 
gesses iudging themselves to be a lawfull Assem- 
bly without dependence on any other power in the 
Province now in being is the highest Court of 
Judicature. And if any Obiection can be made to 
the Contrary Wee desire to heare it" (1 Ar. 388). 
To this communication the upper house gave a 
somewhat menacing answer " vpon the delivery of 
w''*' paper" says its journal "the Burgesses desired 
a Conference with this Vpper howse by j\P Slye 
and M'" Thomas Hinson which was Condisended 
unto." At the conference that followed the Bur- 
gesses " intimated that they could not allowe this 
howse to be a vpper howse " but were willing 
to " sitt with it as one body." The Governor 
(Fendall) assented to the arrangement on certain 
" tearmes " which were so distasteful to the Secre- 
tary (Philip Calvert), that he "refused to enter 



31 



into the lower liowse, it being a manifest breach of 
his LoP* Right Royall Jurisdiction and Seigniory." 
When they again sat in two houses each appears 
to have stood stiffly upon its dignity with the 
other. In 1666 the lower house resent " that their 
proposals to the Upper Howse for the General 
Good of this Province upon their Remand from 
thence hither shall be thus scrible Scrawled & 
obliterated" (2 Ar. 24), and demand satisfaction 
for such an offense. A few days later the lower 
house " desires the upper howse to signify their 
Assent or Disassent immediately" to a measure it 
had adopted " for that this howse are resolved to 
have no further debate thereon " (Id. 37). This 
was met by a response equally peremptory, and a 
member was sent to " make known to the Speaker 
that the Governour expects him with the whole 
Lower howse in the room where the Upper Howse 
sitts within half an hour at furthest." The lower 
house replied that it did not intend by what it had 
done " to disgust the Upper Howse," and was then 
soundly lectured and bidden to " take this rule by 
the Way Obstinate Fortitude is as pernicious to 
the commonwealth as fearful Honesty" (Id. 42), 
a proverb that would have done no discredit to 
Sancho Panza himself. But the upper house could 
go further than merely lecture the lower in case 
of disagreement. On the twenty-third of April, 
1669, it (consisting of seven members) ordered: 



32 



" that the Chancellour & some of the Members of tliis house 
go to the Lower House and require them to raze the mutinous 
& seditious Votes contained in the paper Entituled The Pub- 
lick Grievances delivered into this House by the Speaker the 
20"' April last out of their Journall Before which is done this 
House is Resolved to treat with them no further. It being 
adjudged in this House that it is an Arraignment of the Lord 
Proprietor the Governor & Council" (2 Ar. 177). 

For the four succeeding days the two august 
bodies maintained a most pugnacious attitude. 
The upper house imperiously demanded an expur- 
gation of the journal of the lower house ; and the 
lower gave reason and rhetoric for its refusal. It 
said : 

" We are sorry exceeding Sorry that We are driven to 
Say that your Answer & Objections to the paper Entituled 
the Pnblick Grievances are not Satisfactory or that by the 
refulgent Lustre of the Eradiations of Reason that shine & 
dart from them the weak & dim Eye of our Understandings is 
dazled & struck into Obscurity . . . We shall be willing to 
have our Journal Contradicted, expunged, obliterated, burnt, 
anything, and to have our Grievances appear in any form or 
dress of words most pleasing to yourselves if We might be 
assured that the Weight and pressure of them vnder which 
the Country groans & cryes might be removed" (Id. 180). 

The obnoxious entry was in the end corapromis- 
ingly removed, though the "Grievances" were but 
partially so. 

The vigilance with which both houses guarded 
their dignity and punished '* Contempt " and the 



33 



latitude given to the definition of "Contempt" 
spared neither bar-room nor pulpit. Upon the 
journal of the upper house is entered, " then came 
a Member from the Lower House to desire leave 
to SjDeak with Col. Wm. Evans being a Member of 
this House which was granted" (2 Ar. 14). 

Mr. James Browne " being Elected as one of the 
Deputies & Delegates of Baltimore County " did 
not " attend his service of the Country in the 
General Assembly," and it was " ordei^d there- 
upon that the said James Browne be for his 
Contempt af*^ fined forty pounds Sterling" (2 Ar. 
243). 

If the absence of the member was involuntary it 
w^ould seem that the absentee was subjected to no 
punishment except the loss of pay and perquisites ; 
for at the end of the session of 1650, when the 
committee brought in their "bill of charges" and 
allowed each member fift}^ pounds of tobacco for 
each day's attendance they report " As for that M"" 
ffrancis Brooks was not able throu2,"h sickness to 
attend the howse, and drawing of his wine the 
Committee thinke fitt, not to j^rovide for him att 
all " (1 Ar. 284). 

But when the person supposed to be guilty of 
contempt was within reach he did not escape with 
a mere fine. James Lewis " had abused Mr. Van- 
hacke one of the members of the Lower House " 
and for this contempt the upper house " Ordered 
5 



34 



that the said James Lewis go into the Lower 
House and upon his Knees ask the whole House 
forgiveness and Mr. Vanhacke in particular and 
pay for a fine 2000 lb tob'' " (Id. 254). 

More grievous still was the contempt, and the 
punishment of " Edward Erbury Merchant of the 
Sare of Bristoll," against whom it was alleged 
(May first, 1666) : 

" there was an abuse Comitted last night 
to the disturbance of the whole howse in their quiett & rest. 
And the s'' Erbury did call the wliole howse Papists, Rogues, 
Rogues" . . . "and there is not one in the Cuntry de- 
serves to keepc me Company ; " . . . "and vpon a full debate 
thereon had in this howse, They doe judge the same to be a 
scandall to the Lord Prop'' to liis Lieutenn' Generall & to 
both howses of Assembly & a greate RefleccOn upon the whole 
Province in Generall And therefore vnanimously voted by 
this howse that the s** Erbury be brought before this howse to 
giue answere to the abovesaid Charge in relacon to those 
Informacons now giuen in ag' him." 

And he was accordingly brought before the 
house and being 

" taxed by the speaker of all those words 
spoken .... he answered that he remembered none of those 
words as is alledged Only heConfesseth that he was in drinke 
and remembers not that ever he spoke such words. A^'hich 
answere being taken into Consideracon the howse doe judge 
the same altogether vnsattisfactory & th' noe 'pson of full age 
shall take a<lvantage by drunkennes in such case." 



35 



And the lower house upon this conviction referred 
the case to the upper house to prescribe tit punish- 
ment for the grave offense, and 

"the vpper howse doe 
order that the s*" Erbury be tyed to the Aple tree before the 
howse of Assembly & be there publickly whipt vpon the bare 
back with thirty-nine lashes ... & that the s*^ Erbury doe 
pay the sheriff his fees. . . . And further ordered that the 
s*^ Erbury be after he is whipt brought into both howses of 
Assembly publickly to aske them forgiueness" (2 Ar. 55, 
120). 

On Wednesday, April fourteenth, 1669, Charles 
Nicholett preached a sermon before the lower 
house in which he exhorted them to " Beware of 
that sin of permission," and " to goe on with Cour- 
age " to discharge their duties " agreeable to their 
own Conscience," and it being thereupon charged 
in the upper house " that Charles Nicholett hath 
spoken seditious Words against the Government 
of the Province, It is ordered that a Messenger be 
dispatched away to fetch the said Nicholett to 
make his Appearance in this House to abide the 
Censure of the House for the said Seditious 
Speeches" (Id. 159). His explanation when he 
appeared, though not the same as Erbury's was no 
more satisfactory than his had been, and it was 
thereupon : 

"Ordered that the said Nicholett go to the 
Lower House & there acknowledge his Error in his late Ser- 



36 



mon preached to the LoAver House in that lie modled with 
Businesses rehitiug merely to the Government & there to 
crave the pardon of the Lord Proprietor the Lieutenant 
General & the Assembly & that he bring the Certiticate under 
the hand of the Clerk that he has done it in the face of the 
whole House . , . and that he pay unto John Gittings Clerk 
of the Assembly forty shillings or the value thereof in 
Tobacco for Fees." 

This order was " returned from the lower house 
uiulerneatli which was written, Mr. Xicliolett 
acknowledged in the Lower House as is above 
written" (Id. 163). 

They appear to have been as averse to dishon- 
esty among themselves as to political preaching 
by their ministers, for in the session of 1676 they 
enacted a fine of four thousand pounds of tobacco 
against Henry Ward of "Caecil County:" 

"for that 
being a member of the last Assembly he did Informe the 
sjvid lower house that he had a very good hoi'se lost in the 
Country service in the expedicon to the Whorekills And that 
the Lower house giveing creditt to such Informacon did 
thinke fitt to allow him out of the Publick Leavy Eighteene 
hundred pounds of tobacco, And it is now made Evidently 
appeare that the said Ward lost noe such horse in the Publick 
service and that the said allegacon was most egregiously 
false" (2 A r. 540). 

His fine was thus a little more than twice the 
amount of his dishonest 2:ain. 



37 



Penal Law. 



This idea of restitution to the injured pervades 
many of the acts both of the General Assembly, and 
of the Council. Thus a servant running away was 
held to a double term of service (1 Ar. 348) ; 
and one harboring the runaway was responsible 
for all damages sustained by the escape (Id. 451). 
Whosoever should " wrongfully kill or carry away 
any marked swyne of another man's must pay 
double the value of such swyne to the true owner 
thereof, and 200^ of Tob. more to him that shall 
inform thereof, and 300^ of Tob. more for a ffine 
to the Lord Prop'" (1 Ar. 251; 2 Ar. 29). This 
was afterwards increased to treble the value of the 
hogs stolen (2 Ar. 278). Again it was enacted, 
(1654) that " whosoever shall take and Carry away 
any of the Goods or Chattels of any person con- 
trary to the owners will shall restore four fould 
if able and if not the person or persons so offend- 
ins: as aforesaid shall make the said four fould 
satisfaction by servitude" (I Ar. 344). 

The same principle rules in several laws which 
provide that a man who has incurred a debt 
without the means to pay it should make resti- 
tution by personal service— in other Avords, should 
work it out (1 Ar. 70, 152, 188). And, as a 
security for the creditor, no debtor might have 
a pass, without which he could not leave the 
county of his residence (Id. 160, 174, 194). 



38 



The same principle was applied to " letigeous 
persons " by providing that " all persons what- 
soever that are Cast in any cause be they p." or 
det**® shall be amerced (besides the damages and 
Cost to the Recoverour) ffifty pounds of Tobacco " 
(1 Ar. 486). 

This was milder than the Council desired, for 
its recommendation was " that the party cast in 
appeale shall pay treble dammages for the pre- 
vention of vexatious sutes " (3 Ar. 341). 

Perhaps the most severe application of this 
principle was in the provision that " if the Judge 
thinke any verdict greivious to either party . . . 
and the jury evidently partiall or willful! he may 
charge another jury to enquire and try by the same 
evidence, and if they find contrary to the former 
jury all the former jury may be fined at the 
discretion of the Judge" (1 Ar. 152). 

It is probable that under this law the office of a 
juror became as unpojiular as was the office of a 
constable in New York under the administration 
of Wouter Van Twiller. It must not be thought, 
however, that the Government provided no punish- 
ment for crime but restitution to the injured. On 
the contrary it seems to have had quite a penchant 
for imposing " Condigne punishm*" upon a wrong 
doer "that Soe he may be a Tirrable Example To 
others of Off^ending " (2 Ar. 491). In the session 
of 1638-9 there was passed to the point of engross- 



39 



ment " an act Determining Enormious Offenses " 
(I Ar. 73), designed no doubt to give a catalogue 
and definition of the acts which should be treated 
as felony and render the offender infamous. By 
repeated acts it was provided that the " Inhabi- 
tants of this Province shall have all their rio-hts 
and liberties according to the great charter of 
England " (I Ar. 83), and nothing should " in any 
sorte infringe or prejudice the Just and lawfull 
Lybertyes or priviledges of the free borne subjects 
of the King-dome of England" (1 Ar. 300, 398), 
and that justice should have no delay was em- 
bodied in the oath of the Lieutenant General, 
Councillors and other officers (3 Ar. 210, 213), and 
in matters where there had been no special enact- 
ment for the Province, there " right & just shall 
be determined according to equity & good con- 
cience not neglecting (so far as the Judge or 
Judges shall be informed thereof & shall find no 
inconvenience in applycation to this Province) the 
rules by which right & just useth and ought to be 
determined in England in the same or like cases" 
(1 Ar. 147, 183-4, 435, 448, 487, 504, &c.) 

The large discretion given to the Judge in that 
law was confided to the Judge, Governor or Lieu- 
tenant General by repeated acts, and the punish- 
ment of many offenses (counterfeiting for example) 
was left entirely at the discretion of the Governor 
(1 Ar. 247). Perhaps this was unavoidable in the 



40 



paucity of prisons, or means of restraint ; but there 
were some offenses which the General Assembly 
determined so far as they were concerned should 
not by any possibility, be committed twice by the 
same person ; and others which they wished should 
bear a sure punishment which all should under- 
stand could not be tem]3ered by judicial leniency. 
Treason to the king, the Lord Proprietary, or 
the Lieutenant General, they made punishable by 
drawing, hanging and quartering of a man ; by 
drawing and burning of a woman, corruption of 
blood and forfeiture of all property and franchises : 
Petit treason was to be punished by drawing and 
hanging of a man, by burning of a woman ; sor- 
cery, blasphemy and idolatry by burning ; "Burg- 
lar}'-, Robbery, Polygamic, Sacriledge, Sodomy and 
Rape " by hanging. The exceptions to these modes 
of punishment in this bill were two, to wit : " the 
punishment of death shall be inflicted on a Lord of 
a Mannour by beheading . . . and if the offender 
can read Clerklike in the judgment of the Court 
then the offender shall lose his hand or be burned 
in the hand or forehead with a hot iron & forfeit 
all his lands : againe offending he shall for such 
second offense suffer pains of death & forfeit all 
lands and goods and Chattells " (1 Ar. 71-2). 

In 1641, and again in 1642, it was published 
under the Greate Scale that " It shall be felony in 
any apprentice servant to depart away from his or 



41 



her master or dame with intent to convey him or 
her selfe out of the Province," and in any other 
person to '' Accompany such servant in such 
unlavvfull departure. And the offenders therein 
shall suffer paines of death " (1 Ar. 107, 124). 

In 1650, " Everyone giving false witnes vppon 
oath or perswading or hiring another to give such 
false witnes vppon oath shalbe nayled to the Pil- 
lory and loose both Eares or put to other corporall 
shame or correccon as the Court shall Adiudge : " 
For striking an officer, or witness, or any other 
person in presence of the Court, the offender was to 
lose his hand (1 Ar. 286, 350). 

" If any Idle and Buss-headed person " forged 
and divulged " false rumors news and reports, or 
by Slandering tale bearing or back biting Scandal- 
ized the Good Name of any person " he was doomed 
to pay " from 1000 to 2000 pounds of tobacco and 
be Censured by way of Satisfaction to the Party 
Injured thereby" (1 Ar. 343 ; 2 Ar. 273). 

In 1663 it was enacted " Th? a Pillory & Stocks 
bee sett vpp att every Co""^ howse in Each respec- 
tive County & a Ducking Stoole in the most con- 
venient place of the County," and " th^ the Com"" of 
each County Co'' provide an iron for the burning 
of Malefactors w*'^ the Lre R. & anoth'' w'^^ the 
Lre H." (1 Ar. 490, 491). But for St. Mary's as 
the metropolitan County, an additional luxury was 
provided at the same time in the enactment " tli' a 
6 



42 



Logg howse be built Twenty foot square at St. 
Marv's vppon the Counteyes lands for a Prison" (1 
Ar. 490), at an expense of two thousand pounds of 
tobacco. Whether the officials were blind to their 
duties and privileges does not clearly appear ; but 
three years later a law was published under the 
Great Seal of the Province for something more 
pretentious — "that there be foure acres of land 
ncerest about the Spring on the East side of St. 
Maries feild be allotted to build a prison vpon and 
that there be tenn thousand pounds of tob. raysed 
out of the province to be laid out in building the 
prison" (2 Ar. 139). This prison was intended 
for the accommodation of debtors as well as crimi- 
nals (Ibid, and Id. 542). 

It was probably on account of the inconvenience 
of having but one place of detention for the whole 
province, and not local jealousy on the part of the 
County, that led to the enactment three j^ears later 
*' that there be a Logg house Prison Twenty ifoot 
square Built at Augustine Harman's in Baltymore 
County at an expense of tenn thousand pounds of 
tobacco for p'venting servants & Criminall 'psons 
from Running out of this Province" (2 Ar. 224). 

In what part of the County Augustine Harman's 
was does not appear, but the commissioners of the 
County could not agree as to the location of the 
Court House, and the upper house of the Assem- 
bly, after waiting four years, decided for them, in 



43 



February, 1675, that " the most Convenient Phice 
for the same will be the head of Gunpowder River 
on the North Side," and ordered it erected there 
accordingly (2 iVr. 430). Probably the desire to 
have a locality that was accessible to that part of 
the County that was on the " Easterne side of the 
bay" (3 Ar. 530), had its influence in determining 
the selection. 

The Indian Question. 

It is due to the truth of history, though it may 
not be flattering to pride of ancestry, to say that 
these volumes show that the Indians were always 
under suspicion, and had few rights which the 
colonists considered themselves bound to respect ; 
that in fact they sympathized deeply with the feel- 
ing that is said to have induced another set of men 
to resolve ; (1) " The earth hath the Lord given to 
his saints, and (2) Resolved that we are his saints." 
The colonists do not appear to have been ever 
troubled with a doubt of the power and right of 
King Charles to give all lands and waters abso- 
lutel}^ to Lord Baltimore, or of Lord Baltimore to 
grant it on such conditions as he pleased to them ; 
and in this firm belief they regarded vessels which 
came to their shores without his or their permis- 
sion as pirates, and all persons presuming to place 
foot thereon without recognizing their allegiance 
to Lord Baltimore, whether Dutch, Swedes, or 
Indians, as intruders, trespassers, public enemies. 



44 



An illustration of this is furnished in the case of 
"a Certaine Ship called the Maid of Gaunt in 
1(354." This ship had traded in Virginia by war- 
rant of the Governor of that province, and came 
into St. George's River apparently on the same 
peaceful errand. At all events she had shipped 
part of a cargo belonging to Marylanders, but 
upon the allegation that " the owner and Mer- 
chants thereof were Inhabitants of the King of 
Spain's Dominion " " Cap' Thomas AA'ebber master 
of the Good Ship Called the Mayflower of Lon- 
don " " with the assistance of said ship, men and 
Ammunition " captured her, held her as })rize, and 
was sustained therein by Governor Stone (3 Ar. 
297,305). 

As early as May, 1638, the council conceiving 
that "in so remote an Hand as the He of Kent and 
situate among divers Salvage nations, the incur- 
sions as well of the Salvaoes as of other enemies 
pyrates and robbers may probably be feared" 
appointed John Boteler " Captaine of the military 
band of that He of Kent in all martiall matters" 
with " full power to leavie muster and traine all 
sorts of men able to beare arms and in case of any 
sodaine invasions of Salvages or Pyrates to make 
warre and to vse all necessary meanes to the 
resistance and vanquishing of the enemy " (3 
Ar. 75). 

Among the acts engrossed for a third reading in 
March, 1639, but laid over with all the others was 



45 



one that required every housekeeper to have at all 
times in his or her house for every person " able 
to beare amies one Serviceable fixed gunne of bas- 
tard muskett boare one pair of bandaleers or shott 
bagg one pound of good powder foure pound of 
pistol or muskett shott and Sufficient quantity of 
match for match locks and of flint for fire locks " 
(1 Ar. 77). 

In January, 1639, Governor Leonard Calvert, 
because that " Certain Indians of the Nation called 
the Maquantequats have Comitted Sundry Insol- 
ences and rapines upon the English inhabiting 
within this Province " and refused the satisfaction 
that was demanded " and therefore Compelled us 
to enforce them thereunto by the Justice of a warr " 
commissioned Nicholas Harvey to go " with any 
Company of English as Shall be willing to goe 
along sufficiently provided of arms to invade the 
said Mancantequuts and against them and their 
Lands and goods to execute and Inflict what may 
be inflicted by the Law of warr and the pillage and 
booty therein gotten to part and divide among the 
Company that Shall performe the Service " (3 Ar. 
87). Similar declarations of war, or commissions 
for military service, against the " Sesquihanowes," 
or other aborigines were issued year after year, 
and sometimes two and three times in a year, and 
though the reason assigned at times is " Satisfac- 
tion for Outrages " it is quite as often " punish- 



46 



ing insolences," or preventing them, and the officer 
is commissioned " to goe out upon said Ind : or 
aid : confeder : as shalbe found in any suspicious 
manner & them to expell or vanquish & jiutt to 
death, & their amies or goods to piHage, & thereof 
to dispose at yo"" discretion, & to destroy them or 
any other misch : doe vnto them by hxw war " 
(3 Ar. 132, 137, &c.) 

The proceedings had not always the pretence 
of following the laws of war. In 1641 Governor 
Leonard Calvert proclaimed " I do hereby author- 
ize and declare it lawfull to any Inhabitant what- 
soever of the isle of Kent to Shoot wound or kill 
any Indian whatsoever comeing upon the said 
island" (3 Ar. 99). But the colonists of Kent 
Island were not long to enjo}^ a monopoly of this 
amusement. The next year his proclamation was, 
" I doe hereby authorize all or any of the English 
of this Colony to shoote or kell any Indian or 
Indians in any part about patuxent river that 
shalbe scene or mett either vpon the land or water 
without the said bound after sixe dales after the 
date hereof, except such as have or bear visibly a 
white flag or fane" (3 Ar. 126, 147). With such 
measures of defense and protection it is little 
wonder that we find it proclaimed a few months 
later " these are to publish & declare that the Ses- 
quihanowes Wicomeses, and Nantacoque Indians 
are enemies of this province, and as such are to 



47 



be reputed & proceeded against by all persons " 
(Id. 116, 118), or " noe man able to bear arms 
shall go to church or Chappell or any considerable 
distance from home without fixed gunn and 1 
charge at least of powder and shott" (Id. 103, see 
also 1 Ar. 254). 

The cattle of the colonists, unrestrained, drew no 
nice distinctions between the crops of their owners 
and those of the Indians, and their hogs running 
at large seem to have been a novel and attractive 
species of game for the Indians, who could not 
understand why they should not protect their own 
crops, and hunt all animals running in the woods, 
as for generations they had been accustomed to do. 
For redress the person who had suffered " Spoil in 
his Swine" was permitted to demand "satisfaction 
of any town whose Indians have done him such 
spoil ; " and, in case of refusal, or delay to comply 
with the demand, had " free Liberty to right him- 
self upon any the persons or Goods belonging to 
that Town by all means that he may" (3 Ar. 96). 
With this free license for reprisals it was by no 
means desirable that the barbarians should have 
civilized weapons, and so an act of the General 
Assembly to prevent this was passed (1648) that 
" noe Inhabitant of this Province shall deliver any 
Gunn or Ammunition to any Pagan " (1 Ar. 233) ; 
changed in form the next year to " Noe Inhabitant 
of this Province shall deliver any Gunne or 



48 



Gunncs or Amiinicon or other kind of Martiall 
Arnies to any Indian borne of Indian parentage " 
(Id. 2o0). 

The Governor and Council earnestly sustained 
this policy of disarmament (3 Ar. 144, 160, 260j ; 
and yet it did not secure satisfactory exemption 
from " Insolences." The Indians even had the 
assurance in 1666 to appear before the General 
Assembly and demand that one rule should be 
applied to both peoples. They complained : 

" Your 
h')<rs & Catdc injure Us. You come too near us to live and 
drive Us from place to place. We can tly no further let us 
know where to live & how to be secured for the future from 
the Hogs & Cattle. Emerson hath thrown down the fence 
made by the Indians at Nanjimy about their corn by whicli 
eight men have lost their whole Crop of Corn for which 
they Complain & desire to be secured for the future. Let us 
have no Quarrels for Killing Hogs no more than for the Cows 
Eatins: the Indians Corn. If an Indian kill an Eng-lish let 
him be delivered up M'* Langsworth's children were killed 
and the jNIurthcrers were delivered they found a ]Man Indian 
dead in the ])ath killed by the English for which thav have 
no Satisfaction & desire it may be Considered " (2 Ar. 15). 

The summary manner in which such '' nuir- 
therers " were disposed of when so delivered up 
is illustrated by an entry in the journal of the 
Assembly two years later when the Lieutenant 
General sent it the followini;' messa2:e : 



49 



"You have here sent you the Indian tliat murdered Capt. 
Odber it is that Rogue that caused our kite Troubles Ababcos 
Indians have brought him M"' Henry Courssy knows the 
Indian & does assure me that this is the Fellow that shott 
the said Odber I do hereby order that this Murderer be 
executed at St. Mary's toMorrow." 

But the Greneral Assembly could not tolerate 
such procrastination and indulgence but " Ordered 
that the said Wianamon be shott to death here at 
St. Mary's some time before three of the Clock 
this Afternoon" (2 Ar. 195). 

The methods adopted for protection did not 
differ materially from those still in vogue where- 
ever the two races come in contact: — expeditions 
against them, — confining them to reservations, — 
binding them by treaty. 

The first regular expedition against them was 
authorized in 1642 when it was enacted that " It 
shalbe lawfull to the Lieutenant Generall to make 
an expedition ags* the Sesquihanoughs or other 
Indians as have committed the late outrages vpon 
the English at such time & in such manner as he 
shall think fitt " (1 Ar. 198, 8, &c.). In 1643 
Capt. Tho Cornwaleys Esq having a " propensenes 
to goe a march vpon the Sesquihanowes " was 
authorised "for the vindication of the honour of 
God, & the Xtian and the English name vpon 
those barbarians & inhumane pagans " " to levie 
volunteers & to doe all other things requisite for 
7 



50 



tliG training of the soulcliers punishing of inso- 
lences vanquishing the enemies and disposing of 
the spoiles" (3 Ar. 133). In 1644 Capt. Henry 
ffleete was commissioned " to goe vp wth yo'^ com- 
pany to pascatoway and there to consider whether 
it wilbe more to the honor, safety, or advantage of 
the English to have war or truce wth the Sesqui- 
hanowes at this present," and if he " shall not 
think best to treate or truce wth them you are to 
vse all lawfuU & discreet meanes you can to pillage 
or take them or if it shall seeme best to kill them ; 
and to break off all league and treaty betw^eene 
them and our confederates" (Id. 149, 150). 

In 1647 because that "sundry the inhab** of this 
province had sustayned diuers great losses in their 
estates by the Indians of Nantacoke & Wicomick " 
Captain John Price was commissioned " to take 30 
or 40 such able men as he shall thinke titt and 
make choyce of" and go to the Eastern Shore and 
there to " imploy his uttmost endeauor skill & 
force by what meanes hee may, in destroying the 
s* Nations, as well by land as by water, eyther by 
killing them, taking them prisoners burning their 
howscs destroying their Corne, or by any other 
meanes as he shall iudge convenient" (3 Ar. 191). 

In 1652, in an expedition ordered against the 
" Easterne shore Indians " at the instance of the 
" inhabitants of the Isle of Kent " for the " Sup- 
J)ressing of those heathens and avenging of Guilt- 



51 



less Bloud and the preservation of our lives with 
our wives and children " (Id. 279) it was " ordered 
by the Council that for all Such Indian prisoners 
as Shall happe to be taken and brought in when 
this March is ended they shall be divided accord- 
ing to their Valuation uj^on a Generall Division 
throughout the Province amongst " those who had 
defrayed the expenses of the expedition (Id. 283-4) ^ 
but that it was not intended that this enslaving of 
the Indians should extend beyond those wdiom they 
were pleased to consider enemies is manifest from 
an act of Assembly passed in 1654, enacting that 
" whatsoever person or persons that shall steale 
any friend Indian or Indians whatsoever or be 
accessory in Stealing them and shall sell him or 
them or transport them out of the County shall be 
punished with death" (1 Ar. 346). 

Twenty years later these "friend Indians " ren- 
dered the colony such service that it was " Voted 
by the house tli* Matchcoats Corne Powder and 
Shott be purchased and forthwith delivered to the 
friend Indians by w^ay of gratification for the Ser- 
vices done by the Said Indians in the late Warre 
ag' the Susquehannough Indians, viz to the Pas- 
cutaway, Chapticoe, Nangemy, Mattawoman & 
Pamunkie Indians" (2 Ar. 488). Yet such was 
the distrust of everything bearing the name of 
Indian, that this same vote, that gave this sub- 
stantial recognition of favors received from them, 
required them to deliver hostages to the English. 



52 



Although the proposition that " the only good 
Indian is a dead Indian " had not then been enun- 
ciated, yet the germ of that sentiment was clearly 
vital among them. Tho Matthews, with his brother 
Ignatius, and Henry More, in 1664, went by invi- 
tation to an entertainment given by the " Indeans 
of Pascataway " who " had taken two prisoners of 
the Johnadoes upon the Xorth side of patomake 
river" and reported to Governor Charles Calvert 
" After I came they presently began to torter the 
man and gave mee this Relacon ... as for the 
Relacon & maner of their tortering th™ I omitt till 
I shall see yo" hono'^" (3 Ar. 501). 

Though they may have been interested specta- 
tors when one tribe of Indians tortured another I 
find in the Archives no evidence that they them- 
selves resorted to torture to obtain information — 
at least they did not when they thought a different 
course more certain of obtaining it (Id. 49S) ; still, 
when they went to war, they meant war and not 
peace, and on the same date as the last occurrence 
the Council " Ordered th* Warr be pclaimed ag* the 
Cinego Indians th* a Reward of a hundred Armes 
lenght of RoanOakc be giuen to eury 'i^son whether 
Indian or English th* shall bring in a Cinego 
prison'' or both his Eares if he be slayne " (Id. 
502), and at the same time it was declared "to be 
lawfull for any 'pson Jnhabiting in this prouince 
to kill slay or take prisoner any of the aforesaid 



53 



Cinego or Johnado Indians that shall enter this 
proiiince" (Id. 503). But the saddest illustration 
of their manner of dealing with the Indians, in 
what they called war, which is presented in these 
volumes, is found in the pages that record the 
events of the expedition under the command of 
Thomas Truman against the Susquehanna Indians 
in 1676. These Indians, though a very powerful 
tribe, had shown themselves desirous of peace with 
the colonists, and it is proof of their favorable 
inclination that when a treaty was negotiated with 
them, the reason assigned in the Council was, 
because that " the Indians had a long time desired 
and much pressed for the conclusion of a peace 
with the Government and Inhabitants of this 
Province which as is now conceived may tend very 
much to the Safety & advantage of the Inhabitants 
here if advisedly etfected " (3 Ar. 276) ; and, for 
the same reason doubtless, a further alliance offen- 
sive and defensive was made with them in 1661 
(Id. 420), and yet a further one in 1666 (Id. 549), 
and in this last year the general Assembly had 
declared that the " honor of his Lordship and the 
English Nacon will vndoubtedly suffer by breach 
of faith even to a Heathen" (2 Ar. 131), but the 
officers of this expedition forgot so just a sentiment. 
The plain facts of this transaction seem to be 
that, in 1675, the Susquehanna Indians, being- 
harassed by the Senecas, as they had often been 



54 



before, came to the English settlements, and asked 
for permission to live among the " friend Indians " 
near the settlements ; and this privilege being- 
refused them they " did condescend to remove as 
farr as the head of the Potovvmack " (2 Ar. 429- 
'30). Later in the season there were depredations 
committed upon the settlers in Baltimore and 
Anne Armidel Counties, and also in Virginia, and 
a joint expedition into the Indian countr}^ was 
fitted out b}^ the two colonies under the command 
of Thomas Truman. He, with his force, appeared 
" At the forte of the Susquehannoughs ... on the 
North side of Puscattuway Creek ... on the Sab- 
both morning about the 25 or 26 day of September " 
. . . and sent a messenger to the fort and desired 
" some of their great men to come and Speake with 
the s*^ Majo"" vpon which message of his there came 
out 3 or 4 of them ; " afterwards thirty or forty. 
They were told " of the great jnjuries that had 
been done to the Country and th* he came to know 
who they were th* had done them, And the great 
men Replyed that it was the Senecaes." Further 
parley ensued, the Indians believing that pursuit 
of the marauders was useless, that the retiring 
Senecas might be at this time " at the head of the 
Patapscoe river," and could not be overtaken, yet 
they consented " To assist as Pilates and to joyne 
in the pursuite ag' the Senecaes," and the next 
morning they were promptly at the place appointed 



55 



for meeting for that purpose. They were then 
ao'ain taxed as beino- themselves the authors of the 
injuries compkiined of, " and they vtterly denyed 
the Same and showed an old Paper and a Meddall 
w^'' a black and Yellow Ribbond thereto and the 
Said Indians did say that the Same was a pleadge 
of peace given and left with them by the former 
Governors as a Token of Amity and friendship as 
long as the Sun and Moone should last." Major 
Truman declared to them that he " did believe the 
Senecaes had done the Mischeife and not they and 
that he was w^ll Satisfied Therein ; " yet he placed 
six Indians under guard and consulted with the 
Virginia officers, as the affidavit expresses it 

"Sitting 
upon a Tree Some distance from the Indians and after Some 
While they all Rose and came towards the Jndians and Caused 
them to be Bound, and after Some time they talked againe 
(the Virginians and particularly CoUon^^ Wasshington urging 
the most sanguinary course) soe after further discourse the s* 
Indians were carryed forth from the place where they were 
bound & they knocked them on the head " (2 Ar. 476, 483). 

So utterly inexcusable was the act that the Low^er 
House of the General Assembly accused Major 
Truman of murder; — the UiDper House investigated 
it, examined witnesses, and the Major himself, who 
made no denial of the allegations against him. 
He was adjudged guilty and thereupon the Lower 
House sent the Upper House a bill of attainder 



56 



against him to wliicli the answer returned was, that 
" His Lop and this House doe Conceave it not Safe 
for them To Vote the killing of Susquehannoughs 
Embassadors noe Murther for to them and all the 
world it does and will Certainely appear the great- 
est that ever hath been Committed" (2 Ar. 503). 
And the Upper House informed the Lower " That 
this house Cannot Consent to inflict a pecuniary 
punishment upon a person who hath been accused 
by the Lower House of Murder and by this House 
found guiltie of the Same" (Id. 512). As the 
result of this disagreement, as to the mode of pun- 
ishment, between the two houses no punishment at 
all was inflicted upon Major Truman. In fact 
it may be doubted whether there was any very 
earnest desire for his punishment. It was only 
Indians that he had killed, and though the manner 
in which it was done was not to be commended, 
the thing done was not to be too severely con- 
demned. The destruction of wolves was encour- 
aged by the payment of a bounty from the colonial 
treasury (1 Ar. 346, 362, 372, 428, 446 ; 2 Ar. 325, 
348, &c.), that of the Indians, as we have seen in 
repeated instances, by granting to any who would 
take it, the " pillage," the " spoile " of them, and 
the prisoners themselves for servants. This record 
of their treatment of the aborigines is probably the 
darkest chapter in the history of the colonists. 

In the journal of 1666 "articles of j^eace and 
amity" between the Lord Proprietary and the 



57 



" Indians of Pascataway Anacostanck Doags " and 
eight other tribes are recorded, and in these the 
device of Indian reservations first appears. This 
treaty is one of the most liberal towards the 
Indians of any that were negotiated, for it 
expressly provides that " the privilidge of hunt- 
ing Crabbing fishing & fowleing shall be preserved 
to the Indians inviolably;" but the sort of equality 
recognized appears from a comparison of the 
fourth article, which reads " If an Indian kill an 
Englishman he shall dye for itt," with the eighth 
article which reads " John Roberts & Thomas 
Morris shall pay the Indians of Chingwawateick 
one hundred and twenty amies length of Roane- 
oake for the Indian that was slayne by them at the 
head of Portoback Creeke in August last." This 
unusual severity for the killing of that Indian was 
probably owing to the fact that at this time the 
" Queene of Portoback " was under the special 
protection of the Lord Proprietary. Three years 
before she had made a piteous complaint of the 
trespasses and injuries done her by the colonists, 
and the Lieutenant General had issued a procla- 
mation forbidding the colonists to seat any land 
within three miles of her " habitacons or planta- 
cons" (3 Ar. 489). 

The treaty with the several tribes above named 
" declares the sole pwer of Constituting and ap- 
poynting the Emperor of Pascatoway to be & 
8 



58 



remayne in the R* Hono^^® Caecilius Lord and 
Prop'' of this Province & his heirs ; " (this right 
had been asserted several years joreviously) (3 Ar. 
454, 482). It appoints a king for the "Indians of 
Hangemaick " and it provides " that the severall 
nacons afores*^ shall continue vpon the places where 
they now live," the bounds of these places to be 
fixed by the Governor "as to him in justice shall 
seeme most for the publick good " " within which 
bounds it shall not be lawfuU for the s*^ nacons to 
entertayne any forreign Indians whatsoever to Hue 
with them" (2 Ar. 25, 26). 

Similar steps were taken for the "proteccon" of 
the Indians of the Easterne Shoare near Chop- 
tank " in 1669 (Id. 197, 200), and for the " Matta- 
pany & Patuxon Indians in 1674 " (Id. 354, 360, 
369,373). 

A treaty of inviolable peace and perpetual 
amity and friendship had been " established and 
confirmed with several of the tribes of the " East- 
erne Shoare" in July, 1659 (3 Ar. 363). 

In February, 1675, " some of the greate men of 
the Sussquehannoughs " appeared in the General 
Assembly and " desired to Know what part of the 
Province should for the future be allotted to them 
to Occupy." The Governor was left " to appointe 
a place ; " the Assembly " seeing nothing for it to 
doe but to provide armes Ammunition and Pro- 
vision, and imediately to beginne the warre " (2 



59 

Ar. 451), and they passed "an act for the Raysing 
a present Supply (50,000 pounds of tobacco) for 
his Excellency the Cap' . Generall to defray the 
Charges of making Peace with the Oynegoe Indians 
and making warr with the Susquehannes Indians " 
(Id. 462). How Major Truman conducted that 
Avar we have already seen. 

Other treaties (so-called) bound the Indians 
more rigidly to their good behavior. That with 
the Passayoncke Indians in 1661 provided "that 
in case any Englishman for the future shall hap- 
pen to finde any Passayoncke Indian Killing either 
Cattle or Hoggs that then it shall be lawfull for the 
English to kill the said Indian" (3 Ar. 433), and 
that with the " Delaware Bay Jndians," in 1663, 
contained precisely the same provision (Id. 486). 

Religion. 

Probably nothing in the early history of Mary- 
land possesses more interest, and certainly nothing 
requires more care and delicacy in the handling 
than the question of the religion of the colonists. 
Hallam, speaking of this era in England, says 
"relio-ion was the fashion of the age," and it is 
evident that when the colonists crossed the ocean 
they did not leave this fashion behind them. No 
characteristic is more prominent in all their lan- 
o-uao-e than relioious phrase which abounds in acts 



60 



of Assembly, proclamations, commissions, and so 
forth to a degree that seems to us to savor of 
irreverence, if not of blasphemy. Proclamations 
issued even upon unimportant subjects commenced 
" To all persons to whom these presents shall come 
Greeting in the name of our Lord God everlast- 
ing," and oaths, used on any and all occasions, 
commonly concluding " So help you God and by 
the contents of this booke " (3 Ar. 193, 197, 214, 
218, &c.), were so multiplied, that the General 
Assembly at length interposed its humble request 
to the Proprietary " that such things as your Lord- 
ship may hereafter desire of us may be done with 
as little Swearing as Conveniently may be Expe- 
rience teaching us that a great Occasion is given to 
much perjury when swearing becometh common" 
(1 Ar. 242). Lord Baltimore, if requiring less 
religion of his subordinates than the Puritans of 
New England, yet required at least high moral if 
not religious character of them. In his full letter 
of instructions to Governor Stone in 1651, he 
ordered that no person should be " of our Council 
of State Commander of a County or Justice of the 
Peace " who lived " scandalously or Viciously with 
any Lewd Woman or professed himself of no 
reliiJiion or was an usual Drunkard Swearer or 
Curser " (1 Ar. 333) ; and the same principle that 
has remained undisturbed to the present time was 
adopted in 1654, under the commissioners of the 



61 



Commonwealth, when it was enacted that " T^oe 
work shall be clone on the Sabboth day but that 
which is of Necessity and Charity to be done no 
Inordinate Recreations as fowling fishing hunting 
or other, no shouting of gunns to be used on that 
day except in Case of Necessity" (1 Ar. 343). 
This was a change from four years earlier when 
the journal of a sitting of the Assembly is dated 
"April 6^^ 1650 Sabbath " (1 Ar. 261). When this 
Sabbath law was passed it was apparently sup- 
posed that the business of ordinary keepers fell 
within the category of necessity or charity, but it 
was subsequently determined that it was a " Pro- 
phanacon of the Sabbath or Lords Day " to sell 
strong liquors or permit " tippling or gaming att 
Cards dice, ninepinn playing or other such unlaw- 
fuU exercises," and the same was expressly pro- 
hibited, under the penalty of two thousand pounds 
of tobacco, and other disabilities (2 Ar. 414). 

It cannot be expected that the Archives will 
end the controversy so long and earnestly con- 
tested as to who is entitled to the credit of the 
much-vaunted religious liberty of the colony. But 
there are a few facts which clearly appear : first, 
that the sovereign who granted the charter was not 
a Roman Catholic, nor was that the religion of the 
State at the time : Second, that Lord Baltimore, to 
whom the charter was granted, was a Roman Cath- 
olic : and Third, that the colonists were mingled, 



62 



Roman Catholic and Protestant; all deeply imbued 
with the religious sentiment of the age, zealous for 
their own creed, and desirous, by appeals to preju- 
dice as well as to reason, of giving their own as 
far as practicable an advantage over the opposite, 
which they knew was heresy, yet prepared under 
the circumstances surrounding them to give for the 
time being, a qualified toleration to such heresy, 
though neither of the parties was free from the 
bigotry of the age, or had any clear perception of 
equal religious libert}^ and right, or of a religion 
neither dominating the civil government nor domi- 
nated by the civil government. 

It is also clear that the controlling influence, at 
first, was one that had great regard for the recog- 
nized Christian Saints. A large portion of the 
places to which the settlers gave names bear the 
names of some of the saints of the calendar, and 
later the names are strongly suggestive of Puritan 
origin. Thus we find the Council assembled in 
June, 1662, at a place named "The Resurrection," 
and ordering that " a pryson bee built there " (3 
Ar. 460) ; and when the Protestants made a home 
upon the Severn they named it " Providence " (1 
Ar. 260), and though an act of Assembly erected 
it into a County by the name of "Annarundell 
County" (Id. 292), another act, four years later 
(1654), " Declared that the County now Called 
'Annarundell County' shall be Called and Recorded 



63 



by the name of the County of Providence " (Id. 
345). The same spirit that insisted upon that 
name was willing to dismiss the " St." from names 
already given, and we find " St. Maries County " is 
changed in use (1654) into " maryes County " or 
" County of Maryes " (Id. 340, 354). We find also 
the early dates fixed by Saints' days. The General 
Assembly is to convene on the " morrow after the 
feast of St. Simon and St. Jude " (1 Ar. 113), on 
" Monday after St. James' Day " (Id. 127), " at the 
two most usual feasts of the year viz* the Annun- 
ciation of the Blessed Virgin Mary and Saint 
Michael the Arch Angell " (3 Ar. 234), "at the 
ffeast of our Lords nativity " (Id. 267), &c. 

As religion was the great matter of contest in 
England, so it entered in no slight degree into the 
affairs of the colony from the first. When Lord 
Baltimore (George Calvert), in 1629, driven by 
snow and ice from the inhospitable shores of 
Avalon, went prospecting to Virginia, Governor 
Potts and the Virginia Council remonstrated with 
the home government against granting him any 
special privileges, because he and his followers 
made "profession of the Romishe Religion" and 
they say that: 

"amonge the many blessings and favores 
for which wee are bound to bless God and which this Colony 
hath receaved from his most gracious Majesty, there is none 
whereby it hath beeue made more happy then in the freedom 



64 



of our Religion which we have enjoyed and that noe papists 
have been suffered to settle their abodes amongst us " (3 Ar. 17). 

But the remonstrance was ineffectual. The 
Lord at home was more influential than the 
colonists across the sea ; and when, about three 
years later (1632), the charter was granted to Lord 
Baltimore (Caecilius), the reason assigned was 
because he was " moved by a certain laudable and 
pious zeal for extending the Christian religion and 
extending our empire in parts of America hitherto 
uncultivated and inhibited by Savages and know- 
ing nothing of the Divine Being" (3 Ar. 3). 
Strangely enough for the times there was granted 
to him, though of a different creed from the sover- 
eign and the State, "the patronages and advowsons 
of all Churches which (with the increasing wor- 
ship and religion of Christ) shall be built, together 
with license and faculty of erecting and founding 
Churches, Chapels and places of Worship and of 
causins: the same to be dedicated and consecrated 
according to the Ecclesiastical Laws of our King- 
dom of England" (Id. 4). 

As soon as legislation began religion began 
to be nursed. In the session of 1638-9, when 
everything important was considered and noth- 
ing enacted, among the bills that reached the 
point of engrossment, was one that " Holy Church 
within this Province shall have all her rights 
liberties and immunities safe whole and inviolable 



65 



in all things" (1 Ar. 35, 40, 83). The next year 
it fared better, and was enacted that " Holy 
Church within this Province shall have and enjoy 
all her Rights liberties and Franchises wholy and 
without Blemish" (Id. 96). Another bill in that 
session of 1638-9 made " eating flesh in time of 
Lent or on other days when it is prohibited by the 
Law of England " a crime punishable by a fine of 
five pounds of tobacco (Id. 53), but " idolatry which 
is the worshipping a false God or to commit blas- 
phemy which is accursing or wicked speaking of 
God was a felony to be punished by hanging" 
(Id. 71). The use of proper language was further 
sought to be secured by enactments that " every 
one convicted of pro])hane cursing and Swearing 
shall forfeit five I Tob." (Id. 159, 193). 

In March, 1641, there " was presented by David 
Wickliff'e in the name of the Protestant Catholics 
of Maryland " a petition, and complaint of the 
obstruction of Protestant w^orship, and Thomas 
Gerard, against whom this " petition of the Protes- 
tants " was directed, on hearing by the Assembly, 
was found " guilty of a misdemeanor " and fined 
" 500 I tobacco towds the maintenance of the first 
minister as should arrive" (1 Ar. 119). 

The journal of the English House of Lords 

shows that on the 28th of November, 1645, there 

was presented to " the Com*^^ of Lords & Comons 

for ffbrraio:ne Plantacons The Peticon of diuerse 

9 



66 



the Inhabitants of Maryland setting forth the 
tyranicall Gouernement of that Province, euer 
since its first settling, by Recusants ; whoe haiie 
seduced and forced many of his Ma*^ Subiects, 
from their Religion," and humbly praying the 
assistance and protection of the Parliament. 
" Diuers marchants of the Citty of London trad- 
ing to the English plantations," also petitioned to 
the same etfect, because, they said, " the said Lord 
Baltimore and his agents have not only acted 
horridd things in that province as Papists and 
Enemyes, but alsoe tearmes the Hono^' Parlya- 
ment Rebells " (Id. ]81). Undoubtedly the hand 
of Ingle was in these petitions, yet on considera- 
tion of them it was (December 25th, 1645) "Ordered 
by the Lords in Parlyament assembled. That the 
Comittee for foraigne Plantations, doe drawe vp 
an Ordinance and present it to this House for the 
settling of the Plantation of Maryland vnder the 
Comand of Protestants " (3 Ar. 164-5). The com- 
mittee presented an ordinance accordingly, ordain- 
ing and declaring "that the said Cecil Caluert 
Lord of Baltimore hath wickedly broken the trust 
reposed in him by the said Lres Patents, and that 
it is convenient and necessary that the said Lres 
Patents bee repealed and made voyde," and that 
there be appointed " an able Governor and fitt 
Officers of the Protestant Religion and well affected 
to the Parlyament" (3 Ar. 173). All that followed 



67 

under this ordinance these Archives do not disclose. 
They do show, however, that the Governorship of 
the colony passed, for the time being, out of the 
Calvert family, and that William Stone, a Protes- 
tant, became Governor. In his ofacial oath he 
swore, among other things, " I will not by myself 
nor any Person directly or indirectly trouble 
molest or discountenance any Person whatsoever 
in the said Province professing to believe in Jesus 
Christ and in particular no Roman Catholick for 
or in respect of his or her Religion nor in his or 
her free exercise thereof" (3 Ar. 210). Precisely 
the same provision was inserted in the oath of the 
councillors, a majority of whom were Protestants 

(Id. 214). 

From other sources we know that the three fol- 
lowing were very busy years in England, and the 
climax was reached on the thirtieth of January, 
1649, when the king lost his life upon the scaifold, 
and Oliver Cromwell became protector of the 
Commonwealth. 

Three months after the king's death on the 
twenty-first of April, 1649, the General Assembly 
at St. Maries passed "AN ACT CONCERNING 
RELIGION," which sixteen months later (August 
26th, 1650), was "confirmed by the Lord Proprie- 
tary under his hand and seale " (I Ar. 244). 

It becomes us, as loyal Marylanders, not to 
smile when we hear this famous statute called " an 



68 



act of toleration," and to forget, if we can, that the 
great bulk of it is composed of penalties — fines, 
whippings, severe whippings, banishment, confisca- 
tion and death, against all sorts and forms of 
errors and heresies save those held by the persons 
enacting it, and to remember only that it contains 
the famous and familiar toleration clause ; that if 
we except the enormous exception which it con- 
tains, it embodies a declaration of religious liberty 
as broad and full as can be found in any nation or 
language — a veritable jewel in a toad's head. But 
putting the worst construction upon this as a penal 
act, it certainly gave a larger freedom (or at least 
a diff'erent freedom), than was agreeable to the 
authorities in England. Among the instructions 
to the Commissioners for "reducing the colonies to 
their due obedience to the Commonwealth of Eng- 
land " was one to see that the act of Parliament 
" for abollishing the booke of common praj^er 
was received and enforced" (3 Ar. 265). And 
Cromwell, in his tender care for their religious wel- 
fare, wrote them a letter from Whitehall, in Janu- 
ary, 1653, in which he advised " That Love be 
cherished and the great Interest of Religion be 
owned and countenanced whereby you will ingage 
God's care over you, who alone can make your 
affairs prosperous," &c. (3 Ar. 297). And the next 
year it was " Enacted and declared in the Name of 
his Highness the Lord Protector and bv the 



69 



Authority of the Generall Assembly That none 
who profess and exercise the Popish Religion 
Commonly known by the Name of the Roman 
Catholick Religion can be protected in this Pro- 
vince by the Lawes of England . . but such as 
profess faith in God by Jesus Christ (though dif- 
ferins: in Judc^ment from the Doctrine and Disci- 
pline Publickly held forth shall not be restrained 
from, but shall be protected in the Profession of 
the faith) & Exercise of their Religion . . pro- 
vided that this liberty be not extended to Popery 
or Prelacy," &c. (1 Ar. 341). The commissioners 
for settling the aifairs of the Province had pre- 
viously declared that all such as "doe profess the 
Roman Catholick Religion " should be disabled to 
sit in the General Assembly (3 Ar. 313) . 

In 1656 Lord Baltimore by proclamation (3 Ar. 
325), declares the "act whereby all persons who 
profess to believe in Jesus Christ have liberty of 
conscience and free Exercise of theyr religion " is 
to be duly observed ; and in 1657 he " doth Faith- 
fully promise vpon his Honor to obserue and j)er- 
forme as much as in him lyes " the said act (Id. 
334), and re-guarantees the same in 1659 (Id. 384). 

Religious solicitude for the young appeared in 
1671, when there was proposed "an act for the 
founding and Erecting of a School or College 
within this Province for the Education of youth in 
learning and Virtue," one of the provisions of 



70 



which was "That the Tutors or School Masters of 
the said School or College may be qualified accord- 
ing to the reformed Church of England or that there 
may be two School Masters, the One for the Catho- 
lick and the Other for the Protestants Children and 
that the Protestants may have liberty to Choose 
their School Master" (2 x\r. 262-4). And in the 
same spirit the Upper house, at the same session, 
desired to have incorporated in the " act for the 
Preservation of Orphan's Estates," a provision 
that " First Care must be taken to have the 
Children Educated in the Religion of their dec*^ 
Parents" (2 Ar. 317). But disagreement as to 
the details of the project for a school or college 
caused it to fail entirely ; both parties appar- 
ently preferring that the youth should grow 
up without either " learning or Virtue," than 
that they should have learning and virtue of a 
different brand from their own. 

Quakers. 

Of course there might be errors and heresies so 
sreat as to f>;ive serious cause of alarm and call for 
the most rigorous action. Such an one was dis- 
covered by the colonial Council in 1658 in " the 
increase of Quakers whos denyall of subscribing 
the engagement," in addition to the threatening 
attitude of the Indians, gave such " cause of jeal- 



71 

ousies" that Captain John Odber was commis- 
sioned to put the militia at once on a war footing ; 
and it being discovered that Thomas Thurston and 
Josias Cole had remained in the Province above a 
month without taking the oath of fidelity, it was 
"Ordered That a Warrant should jssue for the 
apprehension of said Thurston and Cole to answer 
theyr misdemeanors" (3 Ar. 348). The warrant 
was issued " to the sheriffe of Annarundell to take 
the body of Josias Cole and him in safe custody 
keepe vt in order without Baile or Mainprise" 
(Id. 350). And an order went "to the Sheriffe 
of Caluert County to bring the body of Thomas 
Thurston to Mr. Henry Coursey's by the twenty- 
fifth of July." These orders were executed and 
then the council discovered the magnitude of their 
undertaking, for not only had they Thurston and 
Cole on their hands, but they were compelled to 
take 

"into consideracon the insolent behaviour of som 
people called Quakers who at the Court in contempt of an 
order then made & proclaimed would presumptiously stand 
covered and not only so, but also refuse to subscribe the 
engagement in that case provided alleadging they were to be 
governed by Gods lawe and the light within them and not 
by mans lawe and vpon full debate . . . ordered that all 
persons should take & subscribe the said engagement by the 
20* of August next or else depart the Province by the 25* 
of March followeing vpon paine due to Rebbells & Traitors " 
(3 Ar. 352), 



72 



and the Governor issued his proclamation accord- 
ingly. Even this did not rescue the province from 
the great danger of Quakers, and the next July the 
Council 

" Ordered as foUoweth : viz 
Whereas it is to well knowne in this Province that there haue 
of late bin seuerall vagabonds & Jdle persons knowne by the 
name of Quakers that haue presumed to com into this Prov- 
ince as well diswading the People from Complying with the 
Military discipline in this time of Danger as also from giving 
testimony or being Jurors in causes depending betweene party 
& party or bearing any office in the Province to the no small 
disturbance of the Lawes & Civill Govern' thereof: And that 
the keeping & detayning them as Prisoners hath brougiit so 
great a charge vpon this Province the Governor & Councell 
taking it into theyr Consideracon haue thought fitt to Appoint 
& doe hereby for the prevention of the like inconveniences for 
the time to com Require & command all & euery the Justices 
of the Peace of this Province that so soone as they shall haue 
notice that any of the foresaid Vagabonds or Jdle persons 
shall againe presume to com into this Province they forth- 
with cause them to be apprehended & whipped from Con- 
stable to Constable vntill they be sent out of the Province " 
(3 Ar. 362). 

Thurston, who still remained, was arrested under 
this order, but succeeded wdth much adroitness in 
showing that it did not apply to his case, where- 
upon, determined that if the general order did not 
cover his case, a special order should be made that 
would, the Council ordered as follows : 



73 

"The board doth Judge That the said Thurston be for 
euer bannished this Province & that if he be found within 
this Province at any time 7 days after the date heereof or 
shall att any time after returne agaiue into this Province that 
he be by the next Justice of the Peace caused to be whipt 
with 30 lashes & so sent from Constable to Constable till he 
be Conveyed out of the Province. And that if he shall then 
at any time againe presume to returne into this Province that 
he be whipt with 30 lashes at euery Constables & be againe 
sent out of the Province as aforesaid. And it is further 
ordered that no person whatsoeuer presume to receaue har- 
bour or conceale the said Thomas Thurston after the tenth 
day of this Present month vpon Paine of fine hundred pounds 
of Tob for euery time that they shall so Keceaue harbour or 
Conceale him the said Thomas Thurston " (3 Ar. 364). 

Those, who, for conscience sake, refused to bear 
arms, were proceeded against by court martial, 
though these Archives do not show precisely what 
penalty was inflicted upon them (3 Ar. 435, 441, 
456). Their meetings to confer over their perse- 
cutions were thought to be full of danger to the 
colony (Id. 494-5), so that in 1666 the Council 
"Ordered that the Secretary doe forthwith issue 
out warr*' to each respective sheriffe for the taking 
the names of such persons within their Balywick 
who goes und"" the Notion of Quakers and to make 
return in a list of theire names and surnames at 
the next Prouin=^" Court" (Id. 547). 

But they were not all driven away from the 
Province, or into concealment. In 1674 Wenlock 
10 



74 

Chriterson, well known in history for his courage 
and steadfastness in maintaining the principles 
and practices of his sect in Boston, having found a 
fresh field in Talbot County, with others "of us 
who are in Scorne called Quakers," sent a petition 
to the General Assembly to be allowed to dis- 
charge certain duties, especially those of witnesses 
and administrators without taking an oath (2 Ar. 
355). This difficult question gave the Assembly 
much and painful deliberation, but after two years 
the Lower House announced its conclusion, that, 
" this house doe Conceave it utterly unsafe for the 
L^ Proprief" to make any Law in this Province to 
exempt the people called Quakers from testifying 
vpon Oath and therefore thinke it Unfitt for this 
house to advise his Lords^ to Condesend to any 
votes of either house of assembly tending that 
way" (2 Ar. 492). 

Temperance. 

Among the perplexing questions with which the 
colonists were called to deal, was one which has 
not yet entirely lost its interest, nor as to the best 
manner of dealing with which is there yet entire 
unanimity. Legislation on the subject was largely 
experimental then, it is hardly other than that 
now. Among the very first bills brought before 
the General Assembly of the Province was one 



75 



" For restraint of Liquors " (1 Ar. 34) ; and in the 
" act for the authority of Justices of the Peace," 
at the same session, it was provided that for 
" Drunkenness which is Drinking with excess to 
the notable perturbation of any organ of sence or 
motion the offender shall forfeit to the Lord Pro- 
prietary thirty pound of tobacco or five Shillings 
Sterling, or otherwise shall be whipped or by some 
other Corporall Shame or punishment Corrected 
for every such excess at the discretion of the 
judge" (1 Ar. 53). 

Pursuing the same policy, that is, treating drink- 
ing itself as the crime, the General Assembly, in 
1642, enacted that " every one convicted of being 
drunk shall forfeit 100 1: tobacco toward the build- 
ing of a prison . . or if the off^ender be a Servant 
and have not wherewith to Satisfie the fine he shall 
be imprisoned or sett in the Stocks or bilbos fast- 
ing for twenty-four hours " (1 Ar. 159, 193). Sub- 
stantially the same was the act of 1650 (Id. 286). 
The act of 1654 went further and made it the duty 
of "every officer and Magistrate in the Province 
from the highest to the Lowest to use all Lawfull 
meanes to convict such as to their knowledge shall 
be Drunke ; " and it imposed an equal fine upon 
" every person in this Province that shall see any- 
one Drunk and shall not within three days make 
it known to the next Magistrate" (Id. 342). The 
" act concerning Drunkness " of 1658 provided a 



76 



severer penalty, and enacted " that hee that shalbe 
lawfully convicted of drunkeness shall for the first 
oifense be sett in the Stocks Six hoiires, or pay one 
hundred pounds of tobacco, ifor the second oifense 
to be publickly whipt or pay three hundred pounds 
of Tobacco. Being the third tyme convicted as 
aforesaid, the Offender shalbe adiudged a Person 
infamous, and thereby made vncapable of giving 
vote, or bearing Office within this Province during 
the space of three years next after such Convic- 
tion " (Id. 375). 

The " Vpper howse " of the General Assembly 
itself imposed this penalty upon Thomas Hills, 
and for " sweareing " when in his cups, com- 
pelled him to " goe to the lower howse and there 
accknowledge his faults with expressing his hearty 
sorrow for the same" (Id. 404). But if the cul- 
prit was an official he did not escape so easily. 
Thomas Gerard was a member of the Council, and 
against him his " Lordships attorney generall " 
filed an information in 1658, charging that he, 
"to the Create offense of Almighty God dishonor 
of his Lordship & whole Councell hath diverse 
times misbehaued himselfe & offended in Drunk- 
ennes & other Lewd behaviour Committed on 
board of Covills ship Rideing in St. Georges River," 
&c. With the information were filed certain affi- 
davits evidently designed to screen him as far as 
the facts would permit. Mr. Henry Coursey swore 



77 



" that he was on board of Covills ship with Mr. 
Gerrard that the said Gerrard had drunke some- 
thing extraordinary but was not so much in drinke 
but he could gett out of a Carts way " (3 Ar. 354). 
Upon this information, for his "crimes and mis- 
demeanors," he was banished from the Province 
with " forfeiture and Conficacon of all his estate 
both reall and personall ; " and though the Gov- 
ernor afterwards remitted that sentence, so far as 
banishment was concerned, yet it was permitted to 
stand as a forfeiture of all franchises and he was 
required to " give Recognizance for his Good 
behaviour" (Id. 409). 

Besides treating drunkenness as a crime in the 
drinker, some effort was made to discourage too 
loose a traffic in spirits. The act of 1638-9 pro- 
vided that where the goods of or in the hands 
of any person are not sufficient to pay all his debts 
. . debts for wine and hot waters shall not be Satis- 
fied till all other debts be paid " (1 Ar. 84). 

A strong effort was made in 1674 to impose a 
heavy duty upon liquors imported, and both houses 
voted a prohibition of their importation from New 
England, New Yorke, and Virginia, yet the vote does 
not seem, to have been matured into law (2 Ar. 361, 
375 to 380) . They recognized the necessity of tav- 
erns in a country like theirs, but they recognized 
also the importance of having good citizens only for 
inn-keepers, and sent a message to his Excellency 



78 



to request that he would issue "a license to keep 
Ordinary to noe person but th* he shall give Bond 
to his Excellenc}'- with good Sureties that they shall 
Suifer noe drinking or gameing upon the Sabboth 
day," &c. (2 Ar. 346) ; and by another act liquor 
selling on the Sabbath was strictly prohibited (Id. 
414). But to them an ordinary without liquors 
was the play of Hamlet with Hamlet's part left 
out. A license for an ordinary was a license " to 
keep an Inn or Ordinary And to make Sale of 
Beer wine Strong Waters or any other fitting and 
'wholesome Drink Vittualls or provisions " (3 Ar. 
304). But the Inn-keepers must have been very 
rapacious, for act after act was passed, fixing the 
prices which they might charge for each liquor 
which they furnished in a list long enough to 
shame the wine card of fashionable hotels of the 
present day. These lists include French Brandy, 
French wine, Canary, Malligoe, Madeira, Fayal, 
"Portoport and other Portugall wine," strong Cider, 
"Clarrett," "Strong Beere or Ale," " Rumm," 
English Spirits, " dutch dramms," " Annisseed 
Rosa Solis," Perry, Quince, Lime Juice, Rhenish 
Avines, Sherry, Mumm and various others (2 Ar. 
148, 214, 296). But they voted that "no ordi- 
nary keeper within this Province shall at any 
time charge anything to Account for Bowles 
of punch or any quantity of mixed Drink 
but shall only sell the several Ingredients to 



79 



the said mixture " at the rates they had pre- 
scribed (Id. 268). The Inn-keepers of course 
found it no difficult task to fix their liquors to 
suit the prices fixed on them by the Assembly, 
which soon led the Assembly to " Conceave th* the 
underrating of the s*^ Liquors hath been the Occa- 
sion of the Soj^histicacon of Liquors " and there- 
fore " Voted by this house th* noe rates or prices 
of anie Accomodacons be set or Ascertained but of 
such only as are of absolute necessity for Sustain- 
ing & Refreshing of Travellers (th* is to say) Horse 
meate mans meate Small Beare & Lodging " (2 Ar. 
351, 407, 560). But they were at their wit's end in 
their effort to find the proper limit to ordinaries, 
that is, to fix the point which would supply the 
necessities of trav^ellers, and would not promote 
dissipation in the youth or in the homes of the 
colonists. It was plain to see that there must be 
an ordinary where the General Assembly met, and 
where the Courts were held; and there many 
wished the licenses to stop. But after much 
deliberation it was agreed to request the Governor 
" by proclamation to suppress all other Ordinaries 
in this Province but that where the Provinciall 
Court & County Courts are kept and Besides in 
Ann Arundell County at Richard Hills, in Patux- 
ent at Richard Keenes & George Beckwiths, in 
Dorchester County at Peter Underwoods and one 
at the Wading Place between Kent and Talbot 



80 



Counties and no more in the whole Province " (2 
Ar. 432, 4). This was in 1675, and a complete 
reversal of the policy which they pursued in 1662, 
when " for the better Encouragement of all honest 
and well minded people whoe now doe or which 
shall hereafter Keepe Victualling howses " they 
conferred upon them special authority and power 
substantially equivalent to that enjoyed by a land- 
lord in the matter of distraining for rent (1 Ar. 
447). 

To them a State House without an ordinary as 
an attachment w^as an absurdity, if not an impossi- 
bility. When they framed " an act for the pur- 
chasing a State howse " at St. Maries for 12,000 
pounds of tobacco, they stipulated that the vendor, 
Mrs. Hannah Lee, should " dwell and keep ordi- 
nary in the same for the tearme of three yeers " 
(1 Ar. 447, 455) ; and when later they engaged 
William Smith "to repaire the Cuntry's howse at 
St. Mary's, he was bound to keep ordinary therein 
for seauen years" (1 Ar. 538; 2 Ar. 50, 51), but 
they did not mean that he should impose upon the 
colony any exorbitant charge for the entertainment 
of its officials, and as they scrutinized his bill in 
1666 they decided 

"vppon debate This Howse is willing 
to allow Will'" Smyth his ace' w""" hee hath charged the bur- 
gesses this Assembly for Liquors : As wine, rumme, Brandy 
Punch & Liminade made with Wine. But th' w*^*" hee calls 



81 



Liminade w^'out strong drinke they will allow only 25 1 pr 
gallon, And as to their dyett & Lodging they will allow 
what they iustly may be charged withall & noe more " (2 Ar. 
127). 

The same frugal mind in the matter of spirits 
was in the Council when they laid in their supplies 
for the military expedition against the Eastern 
Shore Indians in May, 1639, for they at that time 
provided for the soldiers of the expedition a whole 
barrel of oatmeal, but only " 4 cases of hot waters " 
(3 Ar. 85, see also Id. 345). 

Attoeneys. 

Besides the Indians and Quakers there was 
another class of men which fell under the sus- 
picion of at least a portion of the colonists and 
which, incredible as it seems to us they felt that 
they needed some protection against. This appears 
first from the report of a joint committee of the 
General Assembly in 1669, in which the " real 
grievances of the Province " are set forth. The 
fourth specification of these grievances says: 
" That the Privileged Attorneys are one of the 
Grand Grievances of the Country." At the same 
time Robert Morris went before the lower house 
of Assembly, and there did " in the name of the 
Commons of this Province impeach M'' John 
Morecroft Gen' being one of the Attorneys of the 
11 



82 



Provincial Court for exacting fees above and 
beyond the Laws & Customs of this Province & 
that he is retayned as attorney for some with 
unreasonable fees, for a whole year's space so that 
by that means it Causes several Suits to the Utter 
Ruin of people" (2 Ar. 167). 

Five years later there was passed "An Act to 
reforme the attorneys counsellors & Solicit'^ at law 
of this Province to avoyde unnecessary Suites and 
Charges att Law " (Id. 409). From the character 
and reputation which that class of people have 
borne from that time to the present, we are forced 
to conclude, either that the grievance complained 
of was rather fancied than real, or else that the 
reform which was enacted w^as completely success- 
ful, and has been permanent. 

Witchcraft. 

There was another class of people quite as objec- 
tionable to the colonists as Quakers and Attorneys, 
and, if possible, more difficult to deal with. This 
was the witches, against whom the capital statute 
of James was invoked, and at least in the case of 
Mary Lee, on her way to the colony, execution was 
had by the same law (Lynch law) by which one 
Cooper was recently executed in Baltimore Count}'. 
The particulars of this execution are given in two 
affidavits made before and filed with the Council in 



83 

June, 1654. The story as told by one of the 
deponents, Henry Corbyn, of London, merchant, 

" Saith That at Sea upon his this Deponents Voyage hither in 
the Ship called the Charity of London ra'^ John Bos worth 
being Master and about a fortnight or three weeks before the 
said Ships arrivall in this Province of Maryland, or before a 
Rumour amongst the Seamen was very frequent, that one 
Mary Lee then aboard the said Ship was a witch, the Said 
Seamen Confidently affirming the Same upon her own deport- 
ment and discourse, and then more Earnestly then before 
Importuned the Said Master that a try all might be had of 
her which he the Said Master m'^ Bosworth refused, but 
resolved (as he expressed to put her ashore upon the Barmu- 
does) but Cross wids p^'ented and the Ship grew daily more 
Leaky almost to desperation and the Chiefe Seamen often 
declared their Resolution of Leaving her if an opportunity 
oiferred it Self which aforesaid Reasons put the Master upon 
a Consultation with m'' Chipsham and this deponent, and it was 
thought fitt, Considering our Said Condition to Satisfie the Sea- 
men, in a way of trying her according to the Usuall Custome 
in that kind whether she were a witch or Not and Endeav- 
oured by way of delay to have the Commanders of other 
Ships aboard but Stormy weather prevented, In the Interime 
two of the Seamen apprehended her without order and 
Searched her and found Some Signall or Marke of a witch 
upon her, and then calling the Master m' Chipsham and this 
Deponent with others to See it afterwards made her fast to 
the Capstan betwixt decks. And in the morning the Signall 
was Shrunk into her body for the Most part, And an Exami- 
nation was thereupon importuned by the Seamen which this 
deponent was desired to take whereupon She Confessed as 



84 



by her Confession appeareth, and upon that the Seamen 
Importuned the Said Master to put her to Death (which as it 
Seemed he was unwilling to doe, and went into his Cabbinn, 
but being more Vehemently pressed to it he tould them they 
mitrht do what they would and went into his Cabbinn, and 
Sometime before they were about that Action he desired this 
depon* to acquaint them that they Should doe no more then 
what they Should Justifie which they Said they would doe 
by laying all their hands in generall to the Execution of her." 
(3 Ar. 306). 

The " deposition of ifrancis Darby " fully cor- 
roborates Mr. Corbyn in all material points, but 
especially in showing the effort of the master of 
the ship to escape all responsibility for the execu- 
tion. 

The colonists were evidently in sympathy with 
the sentiment expressed by Wesley, three-quarters 
of a century later, that " giving up witchcraft was, 
in fact, giving up the Bible ; " and, as we have seen 
in considering the criminal law^, they placed it, 
under the name of sorcery, by the side of blas- 
phemy and idolatry, as a capital oifence, repeat- 
edly in their statutes. 

The charge to Justices and other officers, often 
repeated in these Archives, was " to enquire of 
all manner of Fellonyes witchcrafts inchantments 
Sorceries Magick Arts trespasses forestallings 
ingrossings and Extorcons whatsoeuer " (3 Ar. 
422, 535, 554, &c.) 



85 

That this diligent quest was not always fruitless 
is shown by a " Petition of the Deputies and Dele- 
sates of the Lower House of Assembly," presented 
to the Governor in February, 1675. This peti- 
tion humbly showed to his Excellency: 

" That whereas 
lohn Cowman being Arraigned Convicted and Condemned 
upon the statute of the first King lames of England &c for 
Witchcraft Conjuration Sorcery or Enchantment used upon 
the Body of Elizabeth Goodale and now Lying under that 
Condemnation, and hath humbly Implored and Beseeched 
Us your Lordships Petitioners to Mediate and Interceede in 
his behalf with your Excellency for a Reprieve and Stay of 
Execution — 

Your Excellencies Petitioners do therefore accordingly in all 
Humble manner beseech your Excellency that the Rigour 
and Severalty of the Law to which the said Condemned 
Malefactor hath Miserably Exposed himself may be remitted 
and Relaxed by the Exercise of your Excellencys Mercy & 
Clemencie upon so wretched and Miserable an Object " (2 Ar. 
425). 

This petition met a gracious reception for it was 
answered that : 

" The Lieutenant General hath Considered 
of the Petition here above and is willing upon the request of 
the Lower house that the Condemned Malefactor be reprieved 
and Execution Stayed, Provided that the Sheriff of St. Maries 
County carry him to the Gallows, and that the rope being 
about his neck it be there made known to him how much he 



86 



is Beholding to the Lower liouse of Assemblie for Mediating 
and Interceeding in his Behalf with the Lieu* General and 
that he remain at the City of St. Maries to be employed in 
such service as the Governor and Council shall thinke fitt 
during the Pleasure of the Governor " (Ibid.) 

In what the Governor could safely employ one 
having the elusive power of a witch we can only 
conjecture. It may be that he desired to use him 
as an instrument for the punishment of other 
criminals, as he had precedent for doing in the 
action of Leonard Calvert, who, when Governor, 
" exchanged the sentence of death of John dandy 
into service for 7 yeares to his Lop & to remaine 
exequutioner of all corporall corrections according 
to the writts lawfully directed to him " (3 Ar. 146). 

May we not hope that the succeeding volumes of 
the Archives will show that this vigilance, or this 
executive clemency, in dealing with witches, induced 
all of that class of malefactors to leave the Province, 
and migrate, on their broomsticks, to Salem, Massa- 
chusetts, where they had an epidemic of them some 
fifteen or twenty years later ! 

But for the contemporaneous records, presented 
to us in these volumes of "Archives," it would 
seem hardly credible that the state of things which 
they demonstrate, could have existed where we 
now live. The rude life, the stern struggle with 
nature and man, the liberality hampered by 
bigotry, the abject submission cou^^led with bold 



87 



assertion of right, the burning religious zeal joined 
with forgetfulness of the charity that true religion 
requires, form a picture of the Spirit of the Times 
in which light and shadow are strangely mingled. 
If we find details which feed our pride, we find 
others that lead us back to humility ; and while we 
regret the " good old times " we can but heartily 
congratulate ourselves that they have passed away. 
Looking back across the gulf of two hundred and 
fifty years, our greatest occasion of rejoicing is at 
the progress made — at the abundant proof fur- 
nished that " the world does move." 










v'^'' c " " 





















Wh^^; 






• ^ .r 



,<^'^ "^^. 











V^^jf/a^ "^^ > ^^ 




















.^" . t ' . , ^r. ' ' .«> , o - = . <P. 









■^ 






•^^ 



« s , .dJ 















^, 



" • ' ^ • . V ^^ " = " " 






•j^s-' - ■^■- --••'''; v^^' :^:^;ii;!^: ^<i' 



^--^ ^mfl.-: A-:^ 















v.>- 



.0 



p 



<^„ 




-^^0^ 



c^ 



^^.■. 








.^^'-^ ^'^S ^^ '^ °^;^^^ ^ ^ -Si 




A^ C N C , ^J" 















•^ /\ ^m-' .Z^-^^. 'Wj r 



'4^ • "' &•■'%> 







JAN ' 



n •> .0 




